The atheist’s problem
Don Coldsmith, Syndicated Columnist
Originally published 01:18 p.m., February 25, 2008
Updated 01:18 p.m., February 25, 2008
About the time that World War II was thrust upon us, the country was already in an undesirable situation. The United States were just emerging from the tragedy of the “Depression,” combined with the Dust Bowl, crop failure, bank failures.
If ever there was a time for hopelessness, that was it. In addition, failure of any sort was regarded as a disgrace. One man whom we knew in southeast Kansas lost his farm, house, everything. It was auctioned off, livestock, implements, poultry, still not enough to pay his debts.
After the crowd that had gathered to watch the auction was dispersed, the bankrupt owner hanged himself with the well rope, unable to bear the disgrace of failure.
What changes since then! There are people who plan their careers around WHEN to take bankruptcy, so as to reap the best results financially. To my grandparents, who survived their losses in two bank failures and worked their way backup again each time, bankruptcy was practically a sin. It was a public announcement which admitted: “I’m a loser!”
A large factor in such a loss was, of course, pride. To admit failure was worse than the loss itself. The tone of the voices at one of those bankruptcy auctions carried the message: “This farmer was a loser!” Flavored with pity, of course.
Many tried for a fresh start, such as California. Of course, the depression had struck there, too.
Ultimately, there were those who began to feel that “God has forsaken us!” This created another approach: “There is no God, that’s an old-fashioned idea.”
A great many educated people, who assumed that they knew about everything, adopted that approach. Sometimes, even, with pride. Some of the better educated ones seemed to take pride in denying the effect that faith can contribute to a situation.
About the next step was for some of the self-appointed experts to deny that there is any higher intellectual power at all. Now, I figure that if the smartest, most enlightened creatures on Planet Earth are mere humans, we’re in a heap of trouble already.
There are those who, in their infinite wisdom, created a name for their kind: literally, Atheists (“those without God,” in scientific terms, presumably).
But wait a moment, here — How can they formulate a statement which depends on something which they have declared does not exist anyway? That sort of a theory seems pretty shaky to me.
Besides, if I accepted this approach, it implies that the modern human is the smartest, wisest creature ever to inhabit Planet Earth. If that is true, fellow humans, we’re really “in a heap of trouble,” as my grandpa used to say.
Now, personally, I see no contradiction at all between “Creation” and “Evolution.” It’s simply two experts, each relating the story to his (her) background. Aren’t both retelling the Creation story? It’s interesting to me that in virtually all creation stories of any belief, the sequence of the creation is about the same: “Water, land, grass, herbs and trees.” “Seven days?” Someone says. But, how long would the Creator’s “day” be? He (or She?) is not limited to our narrow calendar. Those “days” may be a million years or so each, which again fits nicely with our Biblical story.
Once more, I think of the wisdom of my Indian friends. One of the most enjoyable parts of meeting a tribe of strangers would be trading creation stories.
“Say, that’s great! Here’s ours.”
See you down the road.
fvthinker (anonymous) says...
The author said: "[they] created a name for their kind: literally, Atheists (“those without God,” in scientific terms, presumably).
But wait a moment, here — How can they formulate a statement which depends on something which they have declared does not exist anyway?"
Wrong. Someone created the name 'theist'. 'Atheist' is just those that are left over when you subtract those that follow the unsupported, evidence devoid doctrines of a theistic religion. We are all born without theism. And you are presumably atheistic with regards to Zeus and Osiris. We don't have a name for those that don't believe in these many failed mythologies. Atheism is not a thing, it is the lack of a thing.
February 25, 2008 at 4:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Absolute (anonymous) says...
I am not sure what the point of this story is, or what is the atheist's "problem".
February 25, 2008 at 5:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sexingthecherry (anonymous) says...
Also, atheists existed long before the Great Depression.
February 26, 2008 at 8:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nilky (anonymous) says...
"About the next step was for some of the self-appointed experts to deny that there is any higher intellectual power at all. Now, I figure that if the smartest, most enlightened creatures on Planet Earth are mere humans, we’re in a heap of trouble already."
No. Just quite simply no.
Not in a heap o' trouble, except for the fact that the most enlightened people on earth cannot convince the less enlightened people to stop killing people that don't believe the same way, exactly, that they do.
And they can't convince people to stop killing people that their religious/political leaders tell them that they should hate.
There has never been, nor will there ever be, a higher intellect on earth than an educated observant human.
And the only way that I can really answer your statement is... you need to start associating with a higher branch of humanity.
February 27, 2008 at 7:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
"Now, I figure that if the smartest, most enlightened creatures on Planet Earth are mere humans, we’re in a heap of trouble already." I like your style, Doc, even though some don't recognize satire. I wonder how Mark Twain would have fared today?
February 28, 2008 at 8:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )