Humility

Growing up, I could never understand why people thought creationism and evolution were separate, mutually exclusive concepts. I didn't understand where religious people got their basis for this stance, as the Bible is far from clear on how creation occurred, uses allegory quite often, and could just be a misinterpretation of what Moses saw. More importantly, I couldn't figure out why scientific people were so unwilling to consider the concept of some higher power, since science itself does not discredit this. Then, as I grew older, I started to realize that there was no such thing as an atheist. At least, not in the way many atheists like to think.

To explain this point further, I'm going to give a little example. I once encountered a person who was wearing a button that said, "If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair color." I thought this was a little odd, since, in fact, the definition of atheism is skepticism or lack of belief in a god and not in religion. I realize to most people, it's the same thing, but it isn't. Even dictionary.com defines religion as "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe..."* and "a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects." Belief in a god is not a requirement to have a religion. So, yes, in fact, atheism is a religion, because its based on the principles of 'free thought' and skepticism and, in most cases, science.

Now, let me explain my earlier point of there being no true atheists (again, using the 'bald is a hair color' definition of the word). I've met a lot of atheists. I spend a lot of time with them. I think its tough to find an area of study with more atheists than mine. That being said, I think that, among theists, I have some of the more unique views. I have never met an atheist who, given an argument they haven't heard before, actually pauses and thinks about it (or, better yet, comes back later after much thought), tests it with everything they know, and then responds. Every single one has always replied with something dogmatic. I realize, to them, their answer is probably completely rational and logical. But to me, my answer is completely rational, and their answer is one sided. I don't believe in anything blindly. My religious belief is not illogical. I do not believe in something that goes against logic because God is 'mysterious' or some such thing. Who are they to assume that my logic is wrong, and their logic right? Who am I to assume the inverse? This very construction of logic is a person's religion; it is the basis and foundation of what they believe, and very few things can change that.

So why do so many 'open minded' atheists outright deny the opinions of other people? Why do so many outright religious 'nuts' deny the opinion of science? Well, for one, there's biology against us. The last time I went to the Science Museum of MN, there was an exhibit on child development. Among the items in the exhibit was a rather fascinating description of the way a brain grows. (Keep in mind at this point that I'm no neuroscientist, and am going to paraphrase heavily due to imperfect memory.) It turns out, that when we are born, there are a ton of little 'paths' between our neurons. When we make an observation, or need to solve a problem, a rather roundabout path is taken from point A to B. As we grow and continue to make observations, unused paths actually go away. This allows the signal from A to B to travel a much straighter path, making the thought faster. This change allows for the development of experience, a way to react to known situations faster and more effectively. However, it also decreases the ability to effectively encounter new situations. New, unfamiliar thoughts are actually more difficult to have. Thus, our thoughts deteriorate into the most probable state. It takes genuine effort to have a new thought. It becomes increasingly difficult to see things from another perspective. Open-mindedness is not biologically easy.

So, some people reading this may assume that I'm telling people to constantly put forth the effort to see everyone's point of view, to always challenge their own with every new thought or idea they encounter. While, ideally, that would be a good thing, there is simply not enough time to do this. The more we learn, the more we have to test new ideas against, which means reconciliation takes longer. If we truly tried to be open-minded, we would soon run out of time to do anything else.

My real point is this: you are not open-minded. Do not assume someone is crazy, or irrational just because they don't make sense to you. They are not crazy; they simply have a different religion than you. If a person's beliefs or behaviors concern you greatly (either in a good way or a bad way), then perhaps you should talk to that person, try to see things from their point of view. It will require genuine effort and will, however. Even if you fail, that doesn't mean they are wrong. We, as a political, religious and economic world need to stop disrespecting those who think differently from us. Christians are not crazy. Mormons are not crazy. Muslims are not crazy. Atheists are not crazy. Democrats are not crazy. Republicans are not crazy. Socialists are not crazy. Libertarians are not crazy. Respect people, no matter what they believe, because they could always end up being right. If you can find the balance of respecting others while standing up for what you believe, I think you'll end up much happier and more successful. This is, after all, true humility, and the meek shall inherit the earth.

*[ The first definition mentioned does actually go on to mention gods; however, it specifically says "especially..." meaning that it can exist without the aftmentioned content.]