2009.12.09 Post

Atheism vs. Solipsism

John Doe, I think he is the author of this blog, wrote this post, which I came across from vjack's twitter feed (who writes atheist revolution). His post is intriguing, and has many things wrong with it considering why atheists are so vocal about atheism. He doesn't seem to understand why atheists bother arguing about the existence of god. Aside from the fact that it's interesting to speculate about and talk about with people of differing opinions, the real point of interest comes up in the comments, where John Doe (among others) seem to perceive atheists as equal to solipsists: if atheists believe others are just gobs of flesh, why do we bother being vocal about atheism, why do we care about what other people do?

Methinks atheists doth protest too much.

In my first comment, I directly addressed the atheist movement: we want to be recognized, treated humanely by theists, be allowed to maintain our dignity, etc. But John Doe became obsessed with the "gobs of flesh" metaphor -- and he really wanted to know why I, among other atheists, do not perceive other humans as just meatbags, as it were.

I answered that question, directly applying it to myself. I'm expanding upon my answer here because I feel that it really is an important question and the answer is even more important.

“All you said is that you don’t consider them globs, but you didn't say why not.” I don’t consider other humans to be gobs of flesh because it is inhumane to do so, and we are so much more than that. We are not just gobs of flesh — we are capable of thought, creativity, originality, love, hate, reason, superstition, etc. We recognize that one day, we will end. We cherish what we have now (or don’t depending on who you are) because we know that one day, we will no longer be here. As far as I know, we are the only species on earth that knows we are going to die, and what that means.

Humans are very different from gobs of flesh because of this. If I throw coffee on someone, slap them, then stomp on their foot, it elicits a reaction: anger, a wtf moment, maybe a sense of betrayal if I know this person. More that that, though, that person is capable of a variety of reactions: they can choose to forgive me, laugh if it off as if I were being funny, punch me, murder me, or any number of reactions. The reaction is what registers with me, though -- and that's how I know that other people are like me: capable of feeling, reacting, thinking, judging, and forgiving.

If I smile at someone who is having a bad day, their day becomes brighter. That, in turn, makes my day brighter. We've evolved to care about the people around us. When we see someone having a bad day, we want to make their day better (well, I speak for myself here -- there are genuine jerk-offs who don't care -- but that's just it, we're all of us different). I, for one, don't like seeing other people having a bad day, so I reach out to them in some small way -- like a smile -- and it let's them know that not everything is really terrible. It provides a small comfort, a sort of relief, in their day. And that makes me feel good about myself.

My point there is that you don't have to be religious to want to reach out to other people. Kindness and religion are not mutually exclusive, and I am unable to fathom how this idea came to be.

When a small child walks up to me, smiles and tells me I have a pretty smile, I feel warm inside. My day has been brightened. This child is doing exactly what I did in the other paragraph -- reaching out in some small way. Just plain human kindness touches me, and it touches other people. Don't you feel warm when someone smiles at you? When you hear a child laughing in delight? Why should religion influence how we feel when we see other people experiencing the small pleasures that make life worth living?

We all feel pain, love, anger, betrayal, vengeance, guilt, shame, joy, sadness, nostalgia, passion. We all cry, rage against things that make us angry, laugh joyously, tell jokes, and sit in solitude ruminating about our futures and past.

There is a difference between atheism and solipsism. All humans matter in atheism, we are a collective of peoples regardless of what each individual believes. I don't see how the idea that atheist == solipsist came about. Why is it that some theists believe only religion can provide basic human kindness? Just because I do not believe in god doesn't mean I'm going to go about kicking people who are in my way, steal from my neighbors, and automatically consider everyone else less than me. Sure, there are atheists who are solipsists, but there are also christians who are solipsists and people from other religions who are solipsists.

This world would be a pretty damned lonely place if I was the only person I considered to be real, worthy of respect and dignity. And if every atheist truly thought that way, there wouldn’t be an atheist movement. We wouldn’t care that other atheists were struggling to be recognized. After all, why would we?

I wouldn’t be here, writing this passionate argument about why I think theists who believe this idea about atheists are so very wrong.

I truly believe that every single human being is worthy of respect, love, recognition, and dignity because all of us are here for such a short time and then it’s over. Why would I want to take that away from someone else when I know just how much it means to me? Even someone who I disliked immensely? What gives me the right to take that away -- the only thing we ever truly have in this world: our time here? That's something that cannot have any price -- life. It's so precious, it's so rare, and it's so beautiful. What each of us makes of it on our own is up to us. We have nothing but what we have now — and this thought drives me to make life the best it possibly can be, to make it wonderful, brilliant, worth living. It makes me want to make our world a better place so that those who come after me have a beautiful place where they can thrive.

That's why I fight for atheism to be recognized. Not because I want to change theists into atheists, but because I want them to know that, regardless of belief, we are all the same, that life is precious, and that we have to work together to make the world a better place.

2 Comments | Tags:

Comments

Comments

  1. Thanks for your thoughtful response. I must say that a couple of the other self-proclaimed atheists who responded to my blog comment were rude, offensive, and boorish. Hopefully they don't typify the majority of atheists.

    I'm not trying to be confrontational when I talk about "globs" of flesh (I noticed you call it "gobs"--not sure which is correct). To me, that would be the logical conclusion of atheism: To treat humans no differently than animals. Sure, I'm kind to animals, and I abhor their senseless slaughter, but if it comes down to me starving or dying from an animal attack, or one of my loved ones, the animal dies. No ifs, ands or buts. And hey, if I could get a million dollars and be set for life by killing an animal or two, watch out little furry beast. Since that is my attitude about animals, and since I (wrongly, after reading your comment) assumed that all atheists felt the same way about humans as I do about animals, I came up with the globs of flesh statement.

    I still don't consider your response to be "rational," I consider it to be more emotional. Not judging, just saying. Instead of giving me reasons, to me response seems to be more along the lines of "it feels good" to treat humans in a nice manner.

    And the problem with feelings is that they can change. Or what feels good to one person (treating people nice) might differ in another. That other person might "feel good" when he/she mistreats fellow humans, or even when killing and eating them (sorry for the grossness, but you know that there are canibals out there). I TRY (don't always succeed) to treat all humans with dignity and respect not because it "feels" good (oft times it doesn't, and I have to grit my teeth) but because I believe it is the right thing to do.

    I know that I've probably mischaracterized what you wrote, and that I'll probably offend you, but I assure you that is not my intention.

    Avatar John Doe on

  2. The "feels good" was not my intention, and I probably misplaced that. By "it feels good" I meant that it warms me to see other people being happy -- and we have evolved to have sympathetic and empathetic responses to others of our species.

    There are ways to circumvent this particular evolutionary trait, and that's why we have sociopaths. Because, despite the fact that we've evolved to have response to our fellow human beings, it still has to be nurtured. We have to be taught how to do this -- by our parents, our aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc. If they don't show us love, nurture us, coo to us, feed us when we're hungry and cuddle us when we cry as young children, then we never learn what it is to love and be loved. That part of our brain never gets developed, and is for the most part forever gone.

    Everything we have that religion (from my understanding) claims is innate, we have to learn. Children aren't born knowing god -- they have to be taught to believe in him by their parents or others around them. Children aren't born automatically caring about the world -- they have to be taught.

    My parents, I suppose, were excellent teachers in this regard, because I deeply care about the world around me.

    I treat humans differently than animals because we are different from animals. Our brains make us different -- our brains are "superior" to the animal brain, more complex. They give us what animals lack -- what I mentioned in my post. So I won't essay into that again.

    As for me, if someone stood between me and a million dollars, I'd walk away. As I said already, you can't put a price on a human life, and I, for one, would not kill someone to get money. The only reason I would kill another human is if that human was killing others. Furthermore, greed like this is not limited to atheists -- this is a human attribute, something some people would do based upon their ethical code, and something others would not do based upon theirs, regardless of religious beliefs.

    Thank you for the reply, and you did not offend me. I'm not offended when people misunderstand what I say. I'm offended when I am insulted off-handedly and without reason. Our conversation has been most stimulating.

    I guess what I'm trying to say throughout all of this is that what you take for granted in religion -- that everyone deserves life, love, respect, dignitiy, etc -- is not just a facet of religion. It comes from being human, being alive, able to think and reason. These are not gifts from god -- they are things we evolved over thousands of years.

    Avatar river on

Comment

Your Thoughts