As an atheist and a freethinker I have to be realistic and here’s a fact: LIFE SUCKS!
Unknown to the participants of the First Filipino Freethinkers Forum that was held last Sunday (February 1)at the Shang, I have to walk from Novaliches, Quezon City all the way to Shangri-La Plaza just to attend it.. That was a four hour walk non-stop. And the meeting was held in Starbucks – WOAH! And to think of it, my family is quite contented with a Nescafe Coffee Stick. It only cost 2 pesos per stick compare to one order of Starbucks coffee. Is it P175.00 per order? I don’t know, I only drink weak coffee.
Majority of the participants were “yuppies” (young professionals), rich kids and what ever…I just assume they’re rich. Anybody who can afford a 100 peso coffee must be rich.
So that made me think. Is freethought only for the affluent? Is freethought synonymous with guys who graduated from prestigious schools and universities, to those who are successful in life, for those people with cars and are able to dine on fancy restaurants? Is freethought only a vice of well-off individuals just to exercise their bored minds? How about the poor, the destitute, the miserable and the hopeless, can they afford to be freethinkers?
Pragmatism is the philosophy of the poor man. He seems to believe things that have use for him. I sometimes wonder why I become a freethinker in the first place. Don’t get me wrong, my atheism was not fueled by hate of life. Life is not fair, but I don’t blame it to a so-called “Supreme Intelligence”. Maybe I’m a different case…one in a million perhaps. But not every poor people in manila share my enthusiasm with philosophy and science.
It is really impossible to philosophize with an empty stomach, what more in believing that there is no God. Do you think a poor man will have the luxury of time to do some research regarding science and philosophy?
Speaking of research, books are expensive and education is too costly. Poor folks will use their resources more on food. The sad news is that majority of people in the Philippines is below poverty line and because of this world wide economic crisis we are now facing, it is expected to double.
In this situation, what’s use of freethought?
For some people, and especially the poor, this is where religion sets in. religion thrives in a world of crisis. When people become desperate they start to look and cling to any support they can find – even invisible ones. So how can you tell them that they are being used by people who mastered the art of selling God?
I still believe that somewhere in Payatas, Tondo or those shanties in BASECO Compound, someone there is just like a freethinker like me. He may now be writing his thoughts on a piece of paper…he doesn’t have a computer, he can’t afford it. I wonder if people in his community listen to what he says. Christians may say that he is just angry at God because of his miserable life. Poor people are mostly ignored or not taken seriously. I imagine him getting his information from books that are sold cheap in Recto, books that were published in the 60’s and 70’s, too obsolete in modern standards.
Does he sometimes stop from his back-breaking labor to wonder if his arguments are correct or if there’s a new idea that entered his mind? Does he also look in the Internet if he can spare P15.00 from his small salary? Do he also analyzed religious revelations of they are true? How does he handle the idea of having no after-life, which he is doom to live in a miserable existence? Does he also think he’s alone?
Freethought may be expensive but thinking is priceless. It is a matter of cooperation within the Filipino freethinking community to reach to such sad individuals. I believe that social stratification is not a hindrance if the freethinkers’ vision also caters love and camaraderie.
As a freethinker my goal must be realistic so I can reach my hand on a different world- the world without luxury, where hopes and false hopes thrive. This is the world of the impoverished where self-pity becomes a thick haze that blocks the vision of progress. Where pragmatism narrows objective world-view, minds are clouded by distrust and apathy and where poverty limits dreams and aspiration.
Unfortunately there are freethinkers that are trapped in this kind of world, and these are the kind of freethinkers I would like to reach out to.
Until next time,
John the Atheist
Unknown to the participants of the First Filipino Freethinkers Forum that was held last Sunday (February 1)at the Shang, I have to walk from Novaliches, Quezon City all the way to Shangri-La Plaza just to attend it.. That was a four hour walk non-stop. And the meeting was held in Starbucks – WOAH! And to think of it, my family is quite contented with a Nescafe Coffee Stick. It only cost 2 pesos per stick compare to one order of Starbucks coffee. Is it P175.00 per order? I don’t know, I only drink weak coffee.
Majority of the participants were “yuppies” (young professionals), rich kids and what ever…I just assume they’re rich. Anybody who can afford a 100 peso coffee must be rich.
So that made me think. Is freethought only for the affluent? Is freethought synonymous with guys who graduated from prestigious schools and universities, to those who are successful in life, for those people with cars and are able to dine on fancy restaurants? Is freethought only a vice of well-off individuals just to exercise their bored minds? How about the poor, the destitute, the miserable and the hopeless, can they afford to be freethinkers?
Pragmatism is the philosophy of the poor man. He seems to believe things that have use for him. I sometimes wonder why I become a freethinker in the first place. Don’t get me wrong, my atheism was not fueled by hate of life. Life is not fair, but I don’t blame it to a so-called “Supreme Intelligence”. Maybe I’m a different case…one in a million perhaps. But not every poor people in manila share my enthusiasm with philosophy and science.
It is really impossible to philosophize with an empty stomach, what more in believing that there is no God. Do you think a poor man will have the luxury of time to do some research regarding science and philosophy?
Speaking of research, books are expensive and education is too costly. Poor folks will use their resources more on food. The sad news is that majority of people in the Philippines is below poverty line and because of this world wide economic crisis we are now facing, it is expected to double.
In this situation, what’s use of freethought?
For some people, and especially the poor, this is where religion sets in. religion thrives in a world of crisis. When people become desperate they start to look and cling to any support they can find – even invisible ones. So how can you tell them that they are being used by people who mastered the art of selling God?
I still believe that somewhere in Payatas, Tondo or those shanties in BASECO Compound, someone there is just like a freethinker like me. He may now be writing his thoughts on a piece of paper…he doesn’t have a computer, he can’t afford it. I wonder if people in his community listen to what he says. Christians may say that he is just angry at God because of his miserable life. Poor people are mostly ignored or not taken seriously. I imagine him getting his information from books that are sold cheap in Recto, books that were published in the 60’s and 70’s, too obsolete in modern standards.
Does he sometimes stop from his back-breaking labor to wonder if his arguments are correct or if there’s a new idea that entered his mind? Does he also look in the Internet if he can spare P15.00 from his small salary? Do he also analyzed religious revelations of they are true? How does he handle the idea of having no after-life, which he is doom to live in a miserable existence? Does he also think he’s alone?
Freethought may be expensive but thinking is priceless. It is a matter of cooperation within the Filipino freethinking community to reach to such sad individuals. I believe that social stratification is not a hindrance if the freethinkers’ vision also caters love and camaraderie.
As a freethinker my goal must be realistic so I can reach my hand on a different world- the world without luxury, where hopes and false hopes thrive. This is the world of the impoverished where self-pity becomes a thick haze that blocks the vision of progress. Where pragmatism narrows objective world-view, minds are clouded by distrust and apathy and where poverty limits dreams and aspiration.
Unfortunately there are freethinkers that are trapped in this kind of world, and these are the kind of freethinkers I would like to reach out to.
Until next time,
John the Atheist
5 comments:
"As a freethinker my goal must be realistic so I can reach my hand on a different world- the world without luxury, where hopes and false hopes thrive. This is the world of the impoverished where self-pity becomes a thick haze that blocks the vision of progress. Where pragmatism narrows objective world-view, minds are clouded by distrust and apathy and where poverty limits dreams and aspiration.
Unfortunately there are freethinkers that are trapped in this kind of world, and these are the kind of freethinkers I would like to reach out to"
These are the most theistic (and charitable too!) words that I read from an atheist. It simply compares you perfectly to the most sacred man in Rome and in India. Kudos to you! Your fellow atheists, I am sure, is ashamed of this.
However, back to the topic. Two things are worthy of consideration:
1.) you can not think if you are hungry (with an empty stomach).
2.) wealth does not guarantee thinking.
On the first, hunger does not affect thinking per se - i.e, a hungry man can still think; albeit that his thinking might be somewhat unclear; or worse, it might be the thoughts of a madman. Hunger definitely affects the QUALITY of thinking. Now, who determines if one's thinking has "quality" or is "of high quality"? That is a good topic to write about, I suggest you develop that thesis.
For the second; of course, A. Bonifacio and J. Rizal are two cases in point. The former was poor, educated himself (though not so "qualitatively") and is of high intelligence. The latter was well-off, intelligent and one wonders if he might have turned out to be an idiot if he was poor. In any case, it showed that economic (dis)advantage does not have a crucial influence on one's quality of thinking. But to what extent it can influence? - That is also a good topic to investigate about; not only economic conditions, but also climate conditions - if you notice, places that are cold tend to produce mathematicians - Germany, France - Europe in general. Race is also considerable - much of the math and science today are expounded by Jews - Enstein, Godel to name a few.
Ahhh! A man close to my heart. You exemplify what a searcher and lover of TRUTH is all about. Despite all the barriers and all the hardships, you keep on chugging on just like the Little Engine That Could. Youre a great inspiration for us all.
I dont know how being compassionate towards the predicament of others lend one's self to a theistic stance. I hope that is not what ben zayb is saying. Im an atheist and Im just as bleeding hearted than Mother Theresa can ever be. The difference is that I dont have the baggage of having to defend the Catholic Church's hypocrisy or promoting its so called 'humane' policies. In fact, in my experience, I found secular humanist far more compassionate towards the impoverished and under-priviledged than I do religious types with all their varying agendas.
@Ted
The point is you and the most sacred STILL "feel" and "aims" for the same things. For example, an atheist 'cares', so too is a monk.
The atheist has a beloved, and so is the nun in-loved with Christ.
The difference is ONLY IN THE EXTERIOR, but IN ESSENCE YOUR ARE ALL THE SAME - you have aspirations, fears, hopes, affections, emotions and principles!
To be a true atheist is to deny this "essential equality" to that of a theist - in short, be the EXACT OPPOSITE of a theist. But is this possible? Of course not! - both of you are humans. So why is there an Atheist in the first place? What is the phenomenon called atheism?
Most of the time, the atheist is simply discontented and dissatisfied by which religious truths are communicated - e.g, strict and unscientific dogmas; corrupted "religious" men - e.g. corrupted priests; and such all typical non-senses and scandals in an institutionalised form of religion.
Atheists also recourse to the 'sufferings in this world', by which God permits, supposedly permits, as if the Devil himself would not want to do. But surely, this is just discontentment on the traditional notion of God.
But surely this is discontentment - and one's discontent does not nullify the possibility of a God!
Is not that clear to you?
A case in point: Kant was the first to reject positive religion; but he never denied the possible Existence of a God. What were his reasons? Bother to know that; read Hegel too. Do not settle on Sartre, Camus, and those French Existentialists. They are a good read, but certainly they are not the only one's possible. Do not cheat yourself by settling on an idea, Atheism, that is insignificant compared to time. For almost the rest of humanity's existence - there was a God. Only in the 16th century in Europe was this whole phenomenon of Atheism was born. And for all the rest of humanity's life, for 5,000 or more years, there was a God! What is the significance of this? One is living condition; do you think the cave-man can survive if he has no faith in a God? Imagine a life always chased by dinosaurs; always on Guard against nature, against others (in that time, men are cannibals). Surely he, and his tribe, is helpless - thus he needed to invent a God; one who will protect him, give them magical powers, will provide for him, etc, etc. Without these ideas in them, he wouldn't have any motivation and hope at all to live, he will simply cease to try to live, thus his extinction. Imagine if he did not invent a God, do you think the Atheist of modern society is possible at all? No. Human civilisation would just not continue to exist! The fact is that, without the theist, the atheist is impossible.
You might wonder, well God in that case is an invention. But I say, if something is invented does it necessarily mean that it is false? If I invented the airplane, is the 'airplane', the idea of 'a flying object', necessarily false?
These are questions that are worthy of investigation. We should not be quick to conclude at once, especially on delicate matters such as these.
"As an atheist and a freethinker..." Just a thought: can an atheist be a freethinker at the same time?
Post a Comment