A park, at night Thomas: Why would you say we are here, Simon?
Simon: I would say that we are here to remain here.
Thomas: To procreate you mean. As individuals, I would agree that that is a priority and perhaps a duty, but as a species, what of that?
Simon: I can imagine no ultimate aim or point to existence. But I observe that the only thing mankind has done consistently is further its knowledge of the world and the universe in which it lives.
Thomas: So you would say that is our goal, if there is one. To increase our knowledge? To work out how we got here, where we are in the universe, how we relate to it?
Simon: Yes.
Thomas: Doesn’t the acceptance of God’s existence inadvertently answer both the how and why?
Whenever a believer in God considers those philosophical questions, he invariably comes to a premature halt. When confronted by the unanswerable, he gives up striving, and turns to that production of his mind, the idea that was implanted at childhood, God. This creation answers the difficult questions for him. To the atheist the question would remain unanswered, but to the believer it is now closed, sealed. The inquirer is satisfied, and stops seeking a solution. This man, who may have been capable of probing further, of finding an answer, gives up, for all the mysteries can be ascribed to a greater power.
Simon: You are saying that people who believe in God will have no hunger to answer important questions. If all humanity believed in God mankind would not advance.
Thomas: Exactly. I say that religion, by its conclusive nature, its finality, stunts the growth of humanity. And in another way. Would you agree that people need an example, a vision of perfection, to achieve improvement?
Simon: All religions, through the prophets, saints, and fathers of their various creeds, provide such examples.
Thomas: But just as religion provides premature answers to deep questions, does it not, by the very examples of perfection that it describes, shortcut and facilitate the process at which we as a species should be continually struggling. It is a form of complacency. ‘We need only be Christian (or Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu… whichever is chosen) in our behaviour to ensure a comfortable life after death.’ The vision then, is directed not at the present, but beyond it, where it hangs like a promise and a threat. Agreed, if en masse every individual adheres to the Christian way of life, be their motivation the genuine desire to be good or the fear of what will come later, then earthly conditions do improve, but for humanity to prosper surely we should act not as instructed by our disparate religions but by genuine desire. It is another example of religion stunting, through its provision of easy answers, humanity’s progress.
Simon: You are accusing billions of intellectual and moral inertia. But I can prove that religion is necessary for the continuation of humanity.
There are a number of axiomatic rules by which civilised humans live. They are not consciously taught, but our instincts necessitate their deployment in everyday life.
If we, by thinking too deeply, undermined these axioms of nature, the result would be a chaotic breakdown of civilisation.
Thomas: How can ‘thinking too deeply’ undermine civilisation?
Simon: Because without answers, and you must accept that finding those answers will take hundreds of generations, you meet only fear and despair.
I feel it, lying alone in bed, contemplating the universe. Its size, its lack of boundaries, scares The Struggle Shared A Dialogue Between Atheist Friends: 1 Philip Berry’s dialogue between two atheist friends,Thomas and Simon, takes place over a number of years.This first episode is calledYouth – Arrogance and Abstraction. me. And focussing in on this slightly terrifying mental state, I concentrate on our galaxy, and our solar system, and finally our planet, and its people. And I get up, put my clothes on, and think – why the hell am I bothering? Nothing I do will make the slightest bit of difference in this infinite universe. Apathy, nihilism, a drowning sense of unimportance. These are the results of atheism.
Thomas: But Simon, you are an atheist. You’re worrying me. You need to find a way around these feelings.
Simon: I have, I think. I only find myself thinking like that because of our conversations together. It’s not normal. Most people don’t lie awake thinking that way. But if you do, like me, you need to sidestep, let it go past you so as not to get depressed. And I do that by ignoring, by forgetting the unimaginable magnitude of it all, and finding my way through everyday life, like the existentialists.
Thomas: Surely that is a form of self-delusion, just like religious faith.
Simon: Yes, you’re right. And you have proved me right. To exist, to continue in our lives, without hitting that note of despair, you need to create a delusion. I cannot use God, because I know He does not exist, but I can find other ways.
Consider the population of Earth, each individual adult or adolescent mind (and I think it is we, the youth, who think most about these things). They cannot each be expected to find a personal route through this problem. It is far more practical, and healthy, to present to them during their upbringing a ready made structure, a set of answers, to assuage that fearful, frustrated realisation that indeed, nothing really makes much difference… Thomas: A sop, to pacify ignorant minds.
Simon: It is this offensive disregard for your fellow men and women that will isolate you Thomas.
Thomas: Yes, yes. Now listen. I argued that God will perpetuate this deficit in our mental capacity, by suppressing our attempts to increase our understanding. You now argue that this deficit will destroy us, de-motivate us, reduce us to apathetic transients on a planet that will one day be destroyed by supernova, and that God therefore saves us from ourselves. So which one shall we go for – intellectual stunting or a slow death? You might say it’s best to survive: so what if we fail to understand the properties of matter or learn to travel to neighbouring systems, best, surely, to just be. But you cannot agree with that Simon…because you agreed with me that the reason we are here, is to further our understanding. That’s the point of us, you agreed – to understand.
Simon: No. We need faith, to sustain ourselves while we make that effort. Before we arrive at the answers we will have to go through a long uncertain stage, being unsure and doubtful of humanity’s axiomatic principles; so destruction will occur before the resolution of the important questions. We are, in any case, talking of a time scale of thousands of centuries. Look how far we have come… we still do not know if we are alone in the universe, we still cannot make energy without destroying the planet on which we stand, we still cannot suppress the wayward genetics that lead to cancer. We are a long way off understanding how and why, and without God I do not think we can maintain the required social stability to produce the individuals, systems and technologies required to find answers.
Thomas: So we must be carried, protected from uncertainty, cosseted by faith…what chance is there that we will ever comprehend the enormity of existence, if we cannot face the question without such protection?
Philip Berry is a London doctor.He has published various articles in journals,some in dialogue form.
Sofia hopes to publish further episodes of this dialogue in future issues.