"Shrines! Shrines! Surely you don't believe in the Gods? Where is your Argument? Where is your Proof?"

Currently in Earphones: "Abbey Road" Album from Immediate Music

Anja's post concerning her religious views have piqued me to explain my own. I was brought up Christian, but my parents were open minded and let me choose my own beliefs. From the time I was little, I always had the desire to learn the truth of things. My mom recalls the time that I asked if Santa was real or not, and she remembers me being pretty young as well. Though I don't remember the moment, she tells me that I was very worried about the whole concept, and very earnest to know the truth. When she did tell me, I was very relieved, either because the idea of a giant man in red breaking into our house was worrisome, or because I had a sense that things didn't really jive in a factual sense. I've always been a realist, not necessarily because I want to know the truth, but because I find that knowing the way things are is infinitely more comforting to me than something unproven but psychologically comforting.

As such, I find that the label Agnostic Realist fits me well. Anja does a good job of describing what an Agnostic is, and as Sam Harris said in his book The End of Faith, "Realists believe that there are truths about the world that may exceed our capacity to know them; there are facts of the matter whether or not we can bring such facts into view." Whatever higher truth there may be about the workings of the universe, it is still far beyond our grasp, if we are even able to comprehend it at all. It just may be that some giant, hoary Caucasian guy is sitting up in a celestial hall moving things about, but I think that is just as likely that it may be something else, and that postulating a human-like influence is rather presumptuous. As Mr. Harris continues to explain, "To be an ethical [or spiritual] realist is to believe that in ethics, as in physics, there are truths waiting to be discovered - and thus we can be right or wrong in our beliefs about them."

Concerning omnism, I think there is some merit in it, but from a different perspective. I don't believe that there are slivers of divine truth in every religion, but rather that there are bits of human truth in them. Each one has a few good things to say about the behavior, ethical or truthful, of people in general. Whether or not they are right about the workings of the cosmos (or otherwise) is something that I believe to be indeterminate.

Though religion may offer explanations that offer spiritual comfort, I find that I am much more in balance knowing the truths of the world as it is. I would rather believe in scientific discovery and inquiry, because its truths are tangible and provable. As the James Randi quote states at the top of my journal, I want to live in a real world. Like learning about Santa, I will be far more relieved to hear empirical study on the matter or to continue to believe that it is simply unknowable. Making up comforting postulations is all well and good, but to believe and act upon them like hard truth is more worrisome to me.

In my defense, I'm not trying to be a cold realist. I'm moved by comforting things, such as William Cullen Bryant's Thanatopsis (http://www.bartelby.net/102/16.html), it is just that I don't go around incorporating it into what I believe is true about the world. There may be human truths and comforts, but to dress them up and twist them into something divine doesn't bode well with me.

So there you have it, my beliefs as an Agnostic Realist out on the table. Hope that clarifies things.

Enough. More Later,
- James

P.S. - As Shepard Book says, "When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?" Just as I talk about "truth," I'm talking about universal truth, not spiritual or divine truth.