This short “Thought of the Day” post presents a personal opinion on atheism and proposes opening a debate on the same. It is informed by personal experience resulting from an exploration of different faiths this past decade.
A Roman Catholic since I was a foetus, I rebelled by exploring spiritism, wicca, agnosticism and atheism in what I now know to be a search for the meaning of Life in the wrong place: others.
As a re-re-re-converted Roman Catholic version 4.1, I oftentimes reflect on past choices. Here’s a reflection on atheism.
Atheism aimed (what I think is a poorly constructed ideology) mostly against God and the hierarchy of the Church, lead by a Messiah. Atheism doesn’t exist as a faith in its own right but as an antagonistic belief that automatically opposes all divine, supernatural figures and their related rites. It also forgot that all organised society, and most of us in it, need role models and life advice. These are the reasons why I think atheism will never be valid to anyone beyond those seeking attention, social dissociation and recognition from self-appointed “analytical, down-to-earth minds” that curiously assume the same status and burdens that Church leaders have.
The trait that gives atheism away as a “rebellion without cause” is its failure to consider the great mysteries that are human conflict and context. Internal and environmental. Atheism failed to address the critical and humane needs to assert identity and answer existential questions. A topic that C. G. Jung explored in depth.
To live without wondering where everything originates from is to lead a half-life in my opinion.
Admittedly, it could be argued against the above that atheism does attempt to fill the existential void by turning to a divine figure that jealously guards all the answers to existence: science. A figure that will be channelled in due course by a saviour figure in lab robes and thick glasses.
I considered this (in more serious and unbiased terms) but it didn’t do much to amend my view of atheism’s purpose. Science to me is a tool, a methodology, nothing more.
Maybe this personal bias makes it difficult for me to accept (again) that there is any validity in the anthropocentric belief that is atheism. I’d need some reading or ideas on that and any reader’s feedback might help too : ). Please rate, comment, share much appreciated.