List of Chapters

Site Notice

List of Articles

Email Author

Articles Section Article 11 Believers and Unbelievers - Any Difference? If this is your first visit to this site please read the Glossary Introduction This article is not about the argument as to whether god exists or not - that question is irrelevant - and pointless. This is more an observation on the stupidity of unbelievers (atheists and humanists etc) who, despite their self-judged seemingly rational stance, for the most part, are merely believers of some other explanation of existence, and turn out, in the long run, to be nothing more than sheep of a different flock. What Is Believed? As a philosopher I have come to understand just how important and vital is the understanding of the objective GENERAL PRINCIPLE of any 'circumstance' or situation, and to attempt, as much as possible the expel the stupid subjective personal viewpoint - which is nearly ALWAYS incorrect. For example, millions upon millions of people have had the opinion that their 'modern' religion is more rational because they believe in ONE god and regard with scorn those 'savage' and backward people for believing in multiple gods, as if believing in ONE god somehow was a more superior and more rational thought process. They are so wrapped up in their own personal subjective beliefs that they are incapable of making an intelligent objective judgment. It is equivalent to people beliving that they are superior because they believe in only one leprechaun, or only one fairy, or only one magic wand. They are so subjective, blinkered, and stupidly blind that they fail to see the obvious similarity of their respective beliefs. All these beliefs are, for the most part, acquired beliefs. The person who believes in ONE god acquired bes belief in exactly the same learning process as those who believe in multiple gods acquired their beliefs. As an objective observer one should be able to see that both these types of beliefs are of no worth whatsoever (EVEN IF ONE HAPPENED TO BE TRUE! - which they aren't). They are tribal beliefs, acquired tribally. They have no relationship to rational thinking, to truth, or to reality. To all intents and purposes to not believe in god is just another belief system. If it happens to have been acquired tribally it is no more rational than belief in god. To be rational one has to UNDERSTAND why there is no god; why there cannot be a god, and to understand the nature of belief, and NOT to replace the evicted god with another unreal subjective belief - the belief in Mankind. Unfortunately it seems as if a lot of atheists (and humanists) have replaced the irrational belief in god with an irrational belief in the greatness of Man. The Stupidity Of Blaming Religion It seems as if most, if not all, 'un-belivers' are of the opinion that religion is the cause of all the ills of the world and that the believers are somehow more irrational, violent and 'taken over', as if like zombies, by religion. For those interested in the superficial and trite explanations, and those who feel so undeservedly superior, this certainly seems to be the case. But these very people are so stupid that they are actually tripping over their own 'thought processes', contradicting themselves, and are so blind that they cannot see the quagmire they are wallowing in, and that is - despite the fact that they call themselves 'rationalists'. For (truly) rational 'non-believers' this situation should be self-evident. But I will state the obvious case as simply as possible: There is no god. THEREFORE - human beings 'invented' god and invented religion. THEREFORE - any action brought about by religion is ALWAYS going to have a direct connection with, and can be directly attributed to, the human condition. THUS - Man invented god (and religion) is bes own likeness. In other words - RELIGION REFLECTS THE NATURE OF MAN. Yet somehow these 'rationalists' view Man in a very positive way and thus blame religion for the behaviour of Man and yet they say there is no god and therefore Man created this religion. 'Rationalists' should call themselves what they truly are - believers! To blame religion is farcical. It is suggesting the ridiculous notion that Man would not be violent but for religion. When, in actual fact, blaming religion is nothing more than blaming Man. It is similar to the case of a gun. The gun was invented by Man. To actually blame a gun for a murder, or an act of violence, would be totally irrational and demonstrate that the accuser had no connection with reality. It would be DUMB and stupid. GUNS DO NOT KILL - ANYONE. Likewise - RELIGION DOES NOT KILL - ANYONE. HUMAN BEINGS KILL. Religion is bigotted, religion is biased, religion is tribal, religion is irrational - BECAUSE IT WAS INVENTED BY MAN. Man is not violent because of religion . . . . religion is violent because of Man. The bottom line is this: RELIGION IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY VIOLENCE WHATSOEVER. If you cannot grasp that you are just as stupid and irrational as those blind believers whom you criticize. And why are you thus? . . . . . because you are HUMAN . . . . just like them! If you want to contact me to discuss, or to get me to clarify, a specific point, please only do so AFTER reading this carefully. Thank you.

Last Update : 3rd October 2009

<< Article 10 - Is Time Travel Possible?

List of Chapters

Site Notice

List of Articles

Email Author