Some speculation has been seen recently here on the word ATHEIST and its definition. As a newcomer, I hardly carry the authority of a regular and prolific contributor to debate in this forum. I have, however, had a deep, uninterrupted involvement in discussion groups on MSN since 1995.
******************** Firstly, let me establish, as a legitimate basis of argument, that "Proof" is reserved for such pursuits as LOGIC and MATHEMATICS. Science is concerned with observation, experimentation, interpretation and prediction. Science deals in preponderance of probability and has no concern with ultimate, ineffable, implacable, immutable TRUTH. For science, by definition, there is no such thing. All knowledge is subject to change, rejection or modification by newly arrived knowledge.
So proving there is no god is a futile exercise by reason, rational thinking and logic. No one can prove there are no invisible aardvarks, yet the probability of their existence is on a par with that of gods existing. The preoccupation with the conundrum of whether gods exist is the result of persistent and fairly clever marketing strategies. The marketing of invisible aardvarks has suffered a serious lack of attention, but were they to be resourced as munificently as gods have been, then the faithful could easily be convinced, over 2000 years of exposure, that IAs could indeed be responsible for all creation. The idea is no less logical but, sadly, no more amenable of "proof" as any other fantasy.
Secondly, may I introduce a view that I have quietly propounded for several years now that I name PRIMISM. One who is convinced and convicted of this view is a PRIME.
Primism is based upon the legitimate premise that all gods, ghosts, demons, spirits etc appeared as*the desperate resort of a primitive but burgeoning imagination in a primate like Homo sapiens perhaps a million years ago. Primism is a form of atheism that eschews the negativity inherent in the word ATHEIST, where an A is tacked on to the front of THEIST. Such negativity led to claims that without theism atheists could not exist. I sought a positive and practical solution and found it in turning atheism into a doctrine of its own with no implied dependence on the quandary of a god's existence
******************** The Universe was a pristine example of pure chaos evolving to cosmos that we perceive*according to the laws of physics with no supernaturality about it, within it or supporting it. There was nothing but matter/energy, the space it occupied and the physical laws that they*abided by. This was the original and prime condition of the Universe.
******************** This view is simplicity itself and therefore bears the imprimatur of William of Ockham. Religious belief in gods, creationism, etc is barred from such a claim. This view is subject to scientific falsification or verification, whereas religious belief is not.
******************** Humankind has not outgrown its primitive superstitions. In the deep recesses of our brain are instincts and dark things of which*we are*quite unaware and which rarely surface over our more conscious self. Religious belief is the expression and recognition*of fear of the unexplainable. That fear was exploited by a low pecking order opportunist who rose rapidly to the heights of that order.
******************** Humankind is not as far removed from its origins and genesis as we would like to think. We have some distance to travel before we can shuck off the yoke of religious adherence. If our genetic diversity is sufficient to the task we have an untold number of years to become those gods that we dream of and yearn after*today.
Although our Sun may burn out inside 5 bn years, humankind may be fortunate enough to observe this event from a much safer vantage point. Speculating a longer life for humankind enters a seemingly fantasy world of superhuman artificial intelligence and our ability to reverse the processes that inevitably lead to the death of our Universe. This is very well covered in Paul Davies' GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS ch.15. It's depressing but not hopelessly pessimistic.
******************** Religion as a human phenomenon will have an age assigned to it in human history but there will be little of significance to mark it. IMHO, the age will be judged as having contributed little or nothing to the advancement of humankind and contributed much to the hindrance of that advance.
******************** From thence forward all civilisation will be atheistic or PRIME. Providing we survive the primitive superstitious fears we inherited, we will*continue into the original and prime condition of the Universe having survived a great evolutionary test of our worth to endure.
* The future before us is an exciting one but fraught with difficulties and danger. Relying on superstition and the supernatural for guidance, tearfully beseeching help from a figment of our primitive imaginations, will certainly ensure that we are not fit to endure. The next steps in our greatest adventure must be accomplished only with the resources of intellects working rationally and logically and the strong bond of fellowship united in a purpose that will be the greatest we will ever face.
Biggles, Prime********************
