Wednesday, August 29, 2007

On Becoming an Atheist Part II

I'm still struggling today with Christianity. The number of intelligent people I know who still believe in Christianity just baffles me. How can they possibly be so smart and have so much education and unwaveringly, unquestioningly believe it? I don't know. I'm just struggling because I want to be able to live harmoniously with others of different beliefs, but I'm just really having a hard time doing so. I just think they haven't thought about it enough; they don't let themselves venture that far in their questioning and reasoning because they are scared for whatever reason (being ostracized or whatever). Can I just grab the world by the shoulders and give it a good shaking? 'Snap out of it, will you?' But I can't. No matter how much begging or pleading or reasoning I or any other non-religious person does to our religious counterparts, some of them will just never let go of it. They'll cling to their beliefs like a child clings to ner security blanket.
I think the main issue is that religion IS a security blanket. People really don't realize that they can still be good, morally responsible people without religion. Well, that, and that they find comfort in the thought of God and not being all alone in this giant universe. I must admit that giving up on the idea of God, as we generally think of him, can feel disheartening. I mean, all the times that you're so upset that you're inconsolable and you talk to God in your head and somehow find comfort; it's a little sad to think that no one is really listening. I'm ok with it now, though. I am my own therapist. It's never really done me any good to keep everything inside my head, anyway. I've always felt the need to get the thoughts out whether it be expressing them to a friend or on paper or in a blog. It's always given me a sense of relief to get it out. So letting go of a personal God, for me, wasn't as hard as I thought it would be, once I had done it.
Then all that's left is the universe and whether or not something with some level of consciousness purposefully created the universe and if that did indeed happen, was there any need for this something to exist any longer than it took to create the universe. One thing I definitely think to be true is that if that something (God) does exist, it definitely exists somewhere other than the space-time fabric of the universe or another dimension that is currently not detectable or definable at this point.
And if God does exist and did create the universe, did he have any intentions? Did he really intend for people to evolve? It seems highly unlikely that our ordinary little solar system is the only one in the entire universe to have a planet that has life on it. So if God did create the universe and did intend for people to eventually evolve, does that mean that all the other planets that have life on them are exactly like ours and have or will have people on them, too? I find that most unlikely. What are the chances that on another planet, that life once again evolved in a precise enough way to yield humans? A planet that most likely isn't the exact same as ours? The differences could be ever so subtle (but most likely would not be subtle) and cause evolution to proceed in such a different fashion that the result may be barely recognizable to us. If it is ever determined that we are indeed the only planet in the whole universe that supports life, then I may have to completely rethink all of this, but I'm not very worried that that will happen. Anyway, these thought have led me to conclude that if there was/is a God, he didn't have intentions, he only had laws: the laws of science, nature, physics, the cosmos, whatever you want to call them.

Now for a little lesson on genetics and evolution for those of you who aren't science people:

There's a principle called the Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium which describes genetics in populations of organisms that lead to evolution. In order for evolution NOT to occur, these are the things that must NOT happen:

  1. Mutation (everyone knows what this is, I won't explain)
  2. Gene Flow: If Members of a particular population breed with animals of a different population of the same species, the gene pool will be different for the two sets, therefore introducing variation into the population.
  3. Genetic Drift: Since members of the population cannot breed with a different gene pool (because it violates the previous rule), their genes will have certain tendencies and as time goes on, percentages of these traits/genes will steadily rise or drift.
  4. Non-random Mating: Members of the population must mate completely randomly and not be able to be choosy about their sexual partners. (Who expects that to actually occur? haha)
  5. Natural Selection: Certain combinations of genes tend to work out better than others, causing the poor combination of genes to die out.

At any rate, this is something to chew on. To me, the likelihood of none of these things occurring is about 0%, so I must conclude that we evolve and that different combinations of these principles will cause different outcomes of evolution.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

As far as why people cling to religion, I think you missed one huge thing. In the Southern Baptist Church, for example, the whole premise is "accept that Jesus Christ died on the cross for your sins and you won't go to Hell". That's a pretty big thing- believe this and you're spared an eternity in flames. Not knowing or understanding what happens after we die is a tremendous part of why people adhere to religion. Fundamentalist Muslims are an extreme example of this. They aren't afraid to strap explosives onto their chests because once they die, they will be in paradise with 7 virgins.

Food for thought.

Anna Banana said...

In response to Julie's comment, I guess the idea of hell is where I began to lose my faith. It was a very simple train of logical thought and mostly non-scientific. It follows: God wouldn't send us to hell for committing minor sins because it is impossible not to commit a good many minor sins throughout your life. Therefore, the only sins worthy of sending someone to hell for are things that are completely heinous (i.e. murder, rape, etc.). (Ok, this next part's a little scientific) The problem with this is that anyone who is capable of committing such a crime/sin must have some sort of mental imbalance that would lead them to commit the crime/sin and these imbalances are chemical imbalances in the brain. So essentially, these people who get sent to hell are sent there because they had a chemical imbalance that was beyond their control. And it would be completely unfair for God to send these people to hell because they had a biological condition that led them to commit these crimes. Therefore, there's no one left to send to hell, so there is no hell. Then follows: if there is no hell, is there a heaven? And so on and so on...and as it snowballed...here I am...Annie the atheist.

Now, with that said...if there is such a thing as hell I sure hope that it is the final place of unrest for dubya.