Welcome to the Third Annual Atheist Digest Series. This year, yet again, I will change the format a bit from previous years. Though I greatly enjoyed and appreciated having several other authors contribute diaries for the series, I have come to the conclusion that it can become a logistical burden to do it correctly and I don't wish to impose additional responsibility or stress on others or myself this year. I'm going to keep the series as a modest handful of diaries on topics either not fully covered in previous years, or those I feel need revisiting.
I want to stress, up front, and in BOLD, that I do not claim to speak for or represent the views of ALL Atheists. Some may agree with some or most of what I will write, but some will agree with little to none of it. That's fine. I do this FOR the debate, not to try to stifle it, nor to imply that Atheists are a homogenous entity.
This year's schedule and opening diary to follow the calligraphy orgy, but first...
Links to previous series (conclusion diaries contain links to all other diaries that year):
Atheist Digest 2010
Atheist Digest 2009
Upcoming Schedule
Wednesday Evening, 8-10: On Anders Breivik
Tuesday Evening, 8-16: Atheism and Socialism
Sunday Evening, 8-21: Unpacking the Homosexuality Comparison
TBD: Conclusion
I haven't finished any of these diaries yet, but I'm excited to work on them. I think they should be thought provoking and lead to some interesting discussion. Now, on to the topic at hand.
I didn't choose to be an Atheist, I just am. Now, I don't want this to somehow devolve into scientific materialism here (at least how it was defined in this series last year), so I will start with the initial disclaimer that I am not attacking the concept of free will nor asserting that there is no such thing as a true 'choice.' But I will say that I didn't choose to be an atheist because, giving my experience in life, I could not (legitimately) choose to practice any existing religion.
Sure, I could choose to go through the motions of any religion I wished, and most, if not all of those around me could not distinguish me from any other member of that faith. But, there is no way I could make myself believe something I don't really believe. This, incidentally, is the fatal flaw in Pascal's Wager. Leaving aside the absurd notion that there is a way to choose from the numerous options of world religions when hedging to potentially save your skin from the eternal barbeque, one has to think that simply going through the motions of a liturgical set may fool humans, but could not possibly fool the supposed omnipotent being judging your faith. How does being dishonest with myself, and/or those in my community protect me from damnation?
So, because I have seen what I have seen, thought what I have thought, studied what I have studied, and lived as I have lived, I find highly unlikely the prospect that there exists a supernatural being which has power over the living and is the only vote on the after-party planning committee. Even if I were to have certain knowledge that such a being existed, what would give me the ability to determine which, if any, of the pantheon of gods to which various humans pay homage is the correct one? It is a rhetorical question because I am certain I will never have that knowledge and never have to make that choice.
I was not born into an atheist family (I would argue that every human is born an atheist), though it's possible I was born with more skeptical wiring than average. If I had continued to believe in the Christian dogma I was taught at an early age, I don't think I could say that I chose to be a Christian either. I'm not sure if I have a further point to make, other than to just open it up to discussion and see where it goes from here. Welcome to Atheist Digest '11.
Discuss!