Sociale

Is it rational to be an atheist?

Is it rational to be an atheist?

Many atheists think that their atheism is the product of rational and objective thinking, away from "old prejudices and stereotypes". They use arguments such as "I do not believe in God, I believe in science" to explain that evidence and logic, instead of supernatural belief and dogma, support their thinking. But just because you believe in evidence-based research - which is subject to strict controls and procedures - does not mean that your mind works the same way.

When you ask atheists why they became atheists, they often point to "eureka" moments when they realized that religion simply has no meaning and that religious interpretations of the world and life are "non-sense."

Surprisingly perhaps, many religious people actually have a similar attitude to that of atheists. This happens when other theologians and theists speculate that it must be quite sad to be an atheist, as it lacks (as a believer thinks the atheist situation) the philosophical, ethical, mythical and aesthetic fulfillment that religious people enjoy. The atheist is seen as an unfortunate person stuck in the cold world of rationality.

The science of atheism

The problem that every rational thinker has to deal with is that science increasingly shows that atheists are no more rational than theists. Indeed, atheists are just as sensitive as others to “group thinking” and other irrational forms of cognition. For example, religious and secular people may end up pursuing charismatic individuals without asking themselves if they are right. Both believers and atheists have pursued political leaders in horrific acts, whether or not they believe in an above-ground force.

Even atheist beliefs themselves have much less to do with rational inquiry than atheists think. We now know, for example, that the non-religious children of religious parents reject their beliefs for reasons that have little to do with intellectual reasoning but rather with a sense of rebellion. The latest cognitive research shows that the crucial factor is learning from what parents do rather than from what they say. So if a parent says they are Christians but they do not live as such, then do not go to Church and do not follow religious rites their children conclude that religion makes sense. Children, then, do not listen, but imitate the adults around them.

This is perfectly rational in a sense, but children are not processing this to a cognitive level. Throughout our evolutionary history, humans have often lacked the time to check and evaluate what is factual, and to survive they have had to make decisions and make quick assessments. This means that children to some extent simply absorb essential information, which in this case is that religious belief does not seem to matter, although parents nominally call themselves believers.

Even older children and adolescents who actually think about the topic of religion may not approach it as much as they think. Emerging research is showing that atheist parents (and others) transmit beliefs to their children in a similar way to religious parents, by dividing their culture as much as their arguments.

Some parents think that their children should choose their own beliefs about themselves, but what they do next is to convey certain ways of thinking about religion, like the idea that religion is a matter of choice rather than divine truth. It is not surprising that almost all of these children - 95% - end up "choosing" to be atheists.

Science against beliefs

But are atheists more likely to embrace science than religious people? Many belief systems can be integrated more or less closely with scientific knowledge. Some belief systems are openly critical of science and think it has greatly influenced our lives, while other belief systems are extremely anxious to learn and respond to scientific knowledge.

But, this change does not masterfully design whether you are religious or not. Some Protestant traditions, for example, see rationality or scientific thought as essential to their religious life. Meanwhile, a new generation of postmodern atheists highlight the limits of human knowledge and see scientific knowledge as extremely limited, even problematic, especially when it comes to existential and ethical questions. These atheists, for example, may follow thinkers like Charles Baudelaire in the view that true knowledge is found only in artistic expression.

And while many atheists like to think of themselves as pro-science, science and technology themselves can sometimes be the basis of religious thinking or beliefs, or something very similar to it. For example, the rise of the transhumanist movement, which focuses on the belief that people can and should overcome their current natural state and limitations through the use of technology, is an example of how technological innovation is fostering the emergence of new movements that have many in common with religious dogmas /

Edhe për ata ateistë skeptikë ndaj transhumanizmit, roli i shkencës nuk ka të bëjë vetëm me racionalitetin, ai mund të sigurojë përmbushjen filozofike, etike, mitike dhe estetike që besimet fetare kanë bërë përgjatë historisë. Shkenca e botës biologjike, për shembull, është shumë më tepër sesa një temë kurioziteti intelektual - për disa ateistë, ajo siguron kuptim dhe rehati në të njëjtën mënyrë që besimi në Zot ofrohen kuptim dhe qëllim për teistët. Psikologët tregojnë se besimi në shkencë rritet përballë stresit dhe ankthit ekzistencial, ashtu si besimet fetare intensifikohen për teistët në këto situata.

Por, lajmi i mirë për të gjithë të interesuarit është se racionaliteti është një vyrtyr i mbivlerësuar. Zgjuarsia njerëzore mbështetet në më shumë sesa të menduarit racional. Siç thotë Haidt për "mendjen e drejtë", ne në fakt jemi "të dizajnuar për të bërë moral", edhe nëse nuk po e bëjmë atë në mënyrën racionale që mendojmë se jemi duke e bërë. Aftësia për të marrë vendime të shpejta, për të ndjekur pasionet tona dhe për të vepruar me intuitën janë gjithashtu cilësi të rëndësishme njerëzore dhe thelbësore për suksesin tonë.

Është e dobishme që ne kemi shpikur diçka që, ndryshe nga mendjet tona, është racionale dhe e bazuar në prova: shkenca. Kur kemi nevojë për prova të duhura, shkenca shumë shpesh mund t'i sigurojë ato - për sa kohë që tema mund të testohet. E rëndësishmja, provat shkencore nuk tentojnë të mbështesin pikëpamjen se ateizmi ka të bëjë me mendimin racional dhe teizmi ka të bëjë me përmbushjet ekzistenciale. E vërteta është se njerëzit nuk janë si shkenca, askush prej nesh nuk jeton pa veprime irracional, as pa burime të kuptimit ekzistencial dhe dëshirës për komoditetit.

After all from a mathematical point of view being an atheist is a losing game. As the French mathematician Blaise Pascal has argued, if you are a believer and you are wrong, the loss is minimal, while the realization that atheism has been wrong comes too late and can have extremely negative consequences. Therefore, we should be more "rational" when we say we are pro-science, while defending the principle of atheism.

Adapted from "The Conversation" / Tiranapost.al