Science vs. Religion: (Chapter Two) (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, February 21, 2011, 03:04 (4820 days ago) @ David Turell

You make several comments about us gaining a good "how" about the universe but not the "why." 
> > 
> > Personally, I don't understand the seduction of "why" questions. It must be something uniquely Western that I simply managed to miss altogether while growing up. 
> 
> 
> I've thought about this comment for a day or so. My book is semi- autobiograhical, and is meant to show doubters, atheists, or kids asking questions, whether there might be scientific evidence for a greater power. I use the word God because it is familiar usage. UI is a foreign term until some discussion is presented. The style and content of the writing is an attempt to stay at an upper high school, lower college level. One problem is that when I went to school, all those levels were much higher than today. My high school was considered among the top 20 in the country. My college is now ranked (by US Report, however valuable that is) as 15th, varying a little year by year. I tried to pass on my thoughts as simply as I could. The 'why' issue is central to my attempt. And in my thinking as you know, the amazing 'hows' point to a 'why'.-Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily against asking the questions, but they're also necessarily subjective. In my case, keep in mind, growing up as an only child in a single-parent household, you gain a "moving" perspective. Meaning, that which does not move you forward in some way, is something that you necessarily subsume to a higher imperative--be it survival or whatever. So for me, how questions are always much more important than why questions; if you know the how, you don't really need to know the why. Generally in all things it's much better for everyone involved that things just get done. I think I need to treat this a little further. Why questions generally don't have an answer. Therefore--they don't move you forward. -In a grander perspective... probably by about the age of 20 I started mellowing from a militaristic atheist perspective because I started realizing that the question of the existence of God was utterly an inconsequential dilemma. Even if someone was able to prove tomorrow that yes, there really is a God, it wasn't going to affect me on a day-to-day level. I learned how to make my path, I learned how to live my life--psychologically the existence of God isn't going to do anything to enhance me or my human condition.-It's common for atheists to look at theism and call it 'weak.' I used to share that perspective but that too mellowed; to me, whatever a person needs to get through the day is fine by me. In my case, I began the process of self-reliance at the age of 11. I had to cook for myself, do my own laundry--all that. (This would affect me very negatively after the age of 15.) The author Chuck Palaniuk (wrote Fight Club) said that one thing he was toying with in that book/movie was the idea of growing up fatherless. All the atheists he knew, were coincidentally only children to single mothers. That observation chilled me to the core; learning how to live life without a model, forces you to find your own way. Thankfully, the power of myth is a very powerful teacher. And the convenient store scene by itself underlines the majority of my viewpoint on life. -So again, it's not that I don't think 'why' questions are silly, but simply that if you ask one and the answer is "don't know," shelve it. It's not going to do anything for you. Learn the 'how,' come back to the 'why' later. -PS, The education system didn't fail me--I failed IT. Many teachers tried to set me on the right path, but you can't change the path of someone who is determined to move through life in their own way--no matter reality.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"