In Defense of Disbelief

“Vierge Marie”by leo.jeje is licensed under CC BY 2.0

How appropriate that right after Laird’s post, On Spiritual Matters, I should come across this Scientific American article discussing belief and disbelief. The author explains how he was initially indoctrinated to believe in a particular theology, found it wanting, explored other avenues and eventually concluded that, rather than finding something he could believe in, he should accept that disbelief is just as valid. Interestingly, at least for me, he included science in the avenues he explored in his search for the answers to his existential questions.

So where does this leave me, in terms of my search for answers? I’ve given up hope that science can give us a single, objectively true solution to the mind-body problem, one true for everyone. Disbelief, I’ve decided, is the only rational stance to take toward alleged solutions, whether religious or scientific.

He understands how this can be unsettling for some people.

Those who yearn for certainty about who we really are might find disbelief unsatisfying, even frightening. You have no ground on which to stand, no assurance that God or science will take care of us, that everything is going to be okay.

But it’s right for him and he thinks it could be right for others as well. It’s a good article. I recommend reading it if these questions have ever occurred to you.

via In Defense of Disbelief: An Anti-Creed – Scientific American Blog Network


About arjaybe

Jim has fought forest fires and controlled traffic in the air and on the sea. Now he writes stories.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to In Defense of Disbelief

  1. Laird Smith says:

    To have disbelief one must have the greatest of faith.

    • arjaybe says:

      I don’t get it. Doubt = faith?

      • Laird Smith says:

        We have faith that our chair won’t collapse underneath us, we don’t doubt that, so why can’t we have faith in our doubt or disbelief?

        • arjaybe says:

          Okay. Kind of tenuous, but having a certain internal logic, given some definitions of the words. I thought it might have been the old argument from believers that “scientists” are just as bad as they are because they have “faith” in science. See?

          Did you reed the linked article? You should.

  2. Sureiknow says:

    Is that guy trying to start a new religion based on disbelief?

Please let us know what you think. No registration required.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.