For a long time I felt guilty about my faith shaking about total atheism, because it wasn't necessarily true; I still believed in *something* that I couldn't put words on but that I had a growing suspicion wasn't very fitting of an atheist. I adopted the Lifestream analogy as a way to ground my feelings, and I put up a "everyone has the right to believe what they want"-facade. Then I drifted on in slight discomfort, settling into a familiar tune of suspected guilt, and tried to leave the subject alone.
Religion came up again recently in my surroundings, and the conversations have made me realize that I no longer have a problem with it, personally. It's like the floating feeling has solidified into an unshakable truth about the divine in science and the science in the divine. I can go to church, because churches are like museums or giant monuments of human passion, no matter if that passion brought love or destruction. I can openly say I don't believe in god, because I know what I believe in instead; a pattern, a singular shape of the universe like a single line of the most perfect, beautiful code that could ever be produced. And the discomfort and guilt has more than gone away, it has turned into awe and appreciation and happiness for the amazing perfection that is the world.
I still have questions though. The most pressing question is this: is it right to condone religion? Is it right to not question religion where one finds it, but give it free way? Considering the good and bad religion accomplishes, it's hard to figure out if they balance out. How long and difficult would the road be before we've integrated the good of religion into other parts of our society, and would it be worth it? Are we ready for it?
Like the cells that make up our bodies, every human is now part of the neural (or you could call it cybernetic) network that is humanity (or in extension the creature that is the planet Earth, as of now). It would be foolish of me to say that not every single cell is needed, or that not every single decision is critical. Cancer starts with a single cell. It is also pretentious of me to say that the survival or condition of the human race as a whole is any more worth than a single cell in a single human's body, since our solar system could very well be the single cell in some other kind of life, but as a human, I would want to keep humanity around, for now (although that is not true all days).
What I'm trying to say is, I think the decisions we make concerning the inevitable adaptation of old religions that is coming might be one of those do or dies of our race, where the mistakes of a single cell and the ignorance of the cells surrounding it could spell a slow doom for our creature. But the implication paralyzes me. Personally I will never believe in God, and I will never join organized religion for any other reason than political ones, but my attitude towards others is also a part of this process. No one, nowhere, at any time, is excluded from the process, no matter how small their part is. So what is it? What does the pattern say? Am I to speak, or remain silent? Am I to cross the bridge and join in on shouting at people to come over, or sit down and wait for others to join me?
Who are we, those of us who are stuck between the conventions of religion vs science? Not confessing to religion, neither atheists. There's no word for us yet, but there will be I'm sure, because the symbolic answer is: We're evolution. We're synthesis. We're the future.
På väg åt rätt håll
1 week ago