Given the season, and given this site, and given the Pope's recent horrible statements about GLBT, and Obama's choice of Warren, and so on ... there's a lot of stuff about religion floating about. There are satires of religion, statements of religious belief, and all sorts of things.
I'm an atheist, or maybe an agnostic, depending on definition and day of the week. But atheist is the wrong word.
More below the fold.
Perhaps the most vocal atheist right now is Richard Dawkins. When Dawkins writes about science, no one is better. He's clear, knowledgeable, impassioned ... his science books are fantastic. When he writes about religion, however, he makes me want to be a believer.
But then, if I read things the Pope says, or look at what the Hasidim do, or statements by some Muslims, or actions by some Hindus .... well, atheism grabs me again.
But it's not atheists vs. believers. It isn't (say) me and Richard Dawkins on one side and noweasels and Fred Phelps on the other. Nope. It's me and noweasels on one side, and Richard Dawkins and Fred Phelps on the other. Now, I know Dawkins would hate Phelps, and vice versa. But the ways they speak about what they believe make them natural allies. They are - ists.
There are very good people who believe almost anything: Not just Christians, Jews and Muslims, not just the other major beliefs, but anything. You can probably find good people who worship Zeus or the Great Pumpkin or whatever. And there are very good people who believe none of this. And there are bad people who believe, and don't believe.
But the troubles begin, not when someone believes, but when someone becomes an - ist. When someone becomes sure that they are right, and have the one true path. It doesn't matter what that path is: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, communism, Marxism, socialism, atheism, or whatever. When you're sure, in that special sense of sure, that you are right, you are wrong.
But more than wrong - evil. Any belief system can be wrong, and some have been proven wrong. The sun does not go around the Earth. But that doesn't make the belief evil, just incorrect. An incorrect thought or belief can be corrected, provided the person isn't sure, in that special sense of sure. A person who is sure will, instead, smash the telescopes, burn the books, and put the heretics to death.
And this pattern of behavior, as far as I can tell, happens to all - ists. - Ists go from "I am right, you are wrong" to "I am right, you are wrong, therefore you are an idiot", and from there to "I am right, you are wrong, you are harming the world" and from there .... well, here comes the cross and the gulag and the guillotine.
Personally, I've had enough with the crosses and the gulags and the guillotines.
I am not an -ist.
Update [2008-12-24 12:12:30 by plf515]: First, thanks for putting this on the rec list.
Second, from the comments, I apparently wasn't clear on a couple points. a) I am using 'ist' in two ways, because I don't think the right words exist. In one sense, I am an - ist, as I said, I am an atheist. And I have no problem with, e.g., psychologists. But I am also using 'ist' to mean a certain sort of person - people who are absolutely certain that they are right. Sorry for the confusion.
b) On Phelps and Dawkins. Yes, I find Phelps more obnoxious than Dawkins, and I think Phelps has done a lot of harm to the world, while Dawklns has not. I lumped them together partly to be provocative, but also because they share, in my view, a certainty. They also invoke similar reactions in me: Both make me want to dissociate myself from them.