Atheism: The Lesser of Two Evils?
Atheism is little more than an equal and opposite reaction to Theism
In clearer terms: its Antithesis.
Yet a dialectic should exist wherein these polar extremes may be reconciled.
Even if not, let us examine a couple of points of contention between them . . .
For one thing most Atheists claim to rely only on Science for insight into Reality.
However, it's often clear from their rhetoric that they haven't kept abreast of every recent development.
Fewer still seem to be aware that the founding fathers of Quantum Physics wrote some rather mystical essays while they struggled to make sense of their landmark scientific discoveries.
Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schroedinger were hardly Atheistic
Just as Science isn't a static institution that has already answered our deepest questions.
Contrary to what many materialists and positivists think, a lot of these topics (e.g. the Hard problem of Consciousness) are still hotly debated within academic circles.
Furthermore, Consciousness Studies are newer fields of growing interest that keep on yielding significant findings.
Skeptics ignore groundbreaking research from pioneers such as David Chalmers, James H. Austin, Rick Strassman, and Roger Penrose—to name merely a handful of eminent mavericks.
In brief, some militant Atheists quote scientific 'scripture' only where it's convenient for them to do so in much the same way as their creationists counterparts.
Secondly, a common accusation that Atheists level against Religion is that it's responsible for centuries of bloodshed.
This is definitely true and (pardon the expression) heaven forbid any future resurgence of fundamentalist fervor.
Nonetheless, this is also an instance of the teapot calling the kettle black.
Indeed the notion that reason alone and scientific progress derived therefrom can allay all the world's woes has already been proven fatally wrong.
We may even say that it proved most incorrect during the peak of the Industrial Revolution, which brought us the humanitarian horrors of World War I & II.
To be sure, Science has remained subservient to militarized globalism since then, which is presently known as Neoliberalism.
In Academia they call this mess the Failure of The Enlightenment, which ultimately gave rise to Modernity and Post-Modernism alike.
For you see—Science without a functional Ethical framework derived from Philosophy is devoid of compassion or (as scientists might prefer to refer to it) 'subjective bias'.
Again proponents of Atheism gloss over these facts not unlike Catholic Apologists downplaying the Spanish Inquisition.
Why? Simply because Atheism is yet another mental construct, perhaps even a dead end like any form of Theism could well turn out to be.
Human Beings must outgrow their basic need to choose exclusively from binary pairs.
Neither side is ever wholly right (or for that matter left)!
But if we take the entire extant spectrum of cognition into consideration then other options start becoming apparent.
Could future generations attain a balance twixt immaterial mind and tangible matter?
Newer Posts
