Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Do Atheists Form Communes?

I believe it is safe to say that materialists tend to accept the basic claims of Evolutionary Theory. Are there any who don't? Is it possible to be an atheist and reject evolutionary theory? Further, I think many of us are familiar with the basic claim that a world shed of archaic, primitive and backward belief in a spirit realm would be a better place. The planet earth would be more peaceful because religion and violence are irrevocably linked. Our collective health will improve because we won't waste our time on prayer and our money on tithing. Instead, we can spend our money and energy on finding cures through scientific research.

Let us, for the sake of argument, grant the basic assumption that there is no spirit realm. There is no god. There are no gods, angels or demons. Let us also grant the basic claims of Evolutionary Theory.

Okay, now I am for this blog entry an atheist who also accepts the basic claims of theory of evolution. Wow! I feel better already. Anyway, do I now promote my new world view with as much vigor as those religious types? Will the truth set the world free? Hold on a moment.

Given that human beings evolved, why is it that homo religious outnumbers homo atheist? Is there some evolutionary benefit to believing in a spirit realm? That is, if there once were "pre-theistic" human beings, then what happened to them? Did the more violent theistic human beings wipe them out? We don't know. All we know is that "theist" human beings have dominated and continue to dominate.

Now, as an atheist (for the sake of this blog entry) and a human being, I find myself (for entirely instinctive reasons) concerned for the survival of human beings. However, given the record, I suggest that it might be detrimental to the survival of human beings to know the truth about the material nature of the universe. That is, we atheists don't seem to have a good survival rate.

Moreover, what evidence do we have that we can educate people out of their religion, anyway? Given that our "pre-theist" ancestors didn't fair so well for the sake of the human race, perhaps, we atheists ought to keep quiet. Perhaps, atheism is a quick road to extinction. Therefore, let's not be too hasty in our proselytism.

Instead, we can test our hypothesis. I suggest that in the "spirit" of scientific research and the good of humanity that atheists put their claims to the test. We can take a page from homo religious and gather ourselves together in an attempt to form a utopian community like the Puritans, the Benedictines or the Branch Davidians. We can find a plot of land or someone can donate an island to us. I am sure I could find a wealthy theist who would pay to have all atheists shipped to an island. On our island, we can demonstrate living together in atheistic harmony. In the unfortunate event that someone develops theistic tendencies, we can peacefully return them to their own kind (not burn them like those theists). Alternatively, we can ask them to volunteer to argue with us to see if indeed they can be returned to the fold. Once the world sees how well we get along, how advanced our technology is and how healthy we are surely our kind will grow in number.

Now, as I imbibe the spirit and once again become a theist, I can't wait to see what atheists have to say when they no longer have to waste their energies on those of us who are under the god delusion. I hope it's pithy.

Good luck, atheists.

3 comments:

Rosie Perera said...

Touché! Great post!

Unknown said...

"Given that human beings evolved, why is it that homo religious outnumbers homo atheist?"

So, if a lot of people believe something, that makes it right? When everyone thought the world was flat, it was still a spheroid.

"[I]f there once were "pre-theistic" human beings, then what happened to them? Did the more violent theistic human beings wipe them out?"

If the Inquisition, Spanish invasion of the Americas, and persecutions of so-called "heretics" are anything to go by, yes, very probably. Organized religion has a long history of forcing people to swear allegiance to the beliefs of the more powerful, war-like group.

I'll take my chances with science.

HBookbinderGM said...

Thanks for your response skst. It is a perfect set up for my next entry.

With regards to your first comment, nowhere did I suggest it was "right" only apparently from an evolutionary perspective beneficial. All I am suggesting is that the truth may be irrelevant and even harmful to the human species, if indeed the truth is that there is no spirit realm.

As to your second comment, you missed the sarcasm as religion=violence and suppression of truth seems to be the ongoing thesis of the anti-religion polemicists i.e. Christopher Hitchens.

Finally, your parting comment "I'll take my chances with science " is interesting. First, I do not see my post as a science versus religion argument because I see no necessary rivalry between them rather it is more atheist/theist. Second, of course, from a materialist world view one is always taking chances because chance is all there is... see my comment "Good luck, atheists." or "bon chance," if you prefer the French.

Anyway, thanks for reading my ramblings and taking the time to comment.