POEM: Arguing with Atheists

Arguing with atheists is like panning for gold in a bathtub.

This one line poem is certainly provocative, and probably dangerous.  First I would like to concede that I cannot prove that exists.  Secondly, and equally, I don’t think that is a proper understanding of to conclude that cannot exist.  Thus the chasm between theists and atheists.  Actually, the term “” is so loaded for people I would like to suggest a different tack.  I think the issue boils down to an between and .  I find that the predominant view of atheists that I have met or read about seem to take an objectivist view, what I would call .  While this view can be very helpful for understanding part of , it specifically out any subjective .  While this seems eminently reasonable to most people of a scientific bent, it ignores the most basic of human : that humans are subjects, subjective.  If folks would argue that people are not subjects or subjective, then we don’t have much to talk about, and perhaps all that we do have to talk about has been predetermined in the infinite cascade of objective cause-and-effect.  The or arguments that preclude or exclude subjects or destroys both humans and in a single stroke.  Now, while it seems quite easy in terms of or Occam’s razor, to just eliminate , the “Subject”, from the equation, eliminating oneself and all other subjects seems much more dangerous, even .  I can probably appreciate as much of the next person, probably more.  However, comes to a nice clean and neat end when it reaches , which perhaps ironically, it inevitably does.  It can go no further.  I wish to go further.  This requires uncertainty, even .  However, I think that this is where the gold is found.  Panning for gold can be a long and tedious process, and it may not even pay off for many, maybe even most.  Nonetheless, such gold cannot be found in a bathtub, the proverbial scientific reductionist billiard ball world.

One last note, on the concept of arguing.  Arguing is often seen as an intellectual exercise.  Unfortunately, the has its limits, and there are places for which it is not an adequate instrument to explore.  These are the matters of the , of , of itself, which cannot be reduced to a machine, at least not with the unintended consequences of killing .  Residing in the , centering our around the , living a wholehearted , is a way enterprise.  There is , and we discover that through our subjective faculties.  I must surpass or transcends mere .  I must literally vote with my life, my life force, the subjectivity that is mine.  Ultimately, talking about or arguing about things is inadequate.  What we do matters.  How we live our life matters.  Ultimately, our life is our message.  If someone else’s life seems argumentative with our own message, then so be it.  A certain amount of and is necessary in life.  I don’t think many would argue with that.  Though feel free to pan my views…

Leave a Reply