Why I’m An Agnostic

Today I was evangelized by a young paediatric oncologist who preached about how his belief in God helped him through medical school and work, keeping him away from the peer influences of alcohol and drugs. This incredibly nice but stoic doctor shared with me the New Testament and encouraged me to find a church.

Many people ask me where I stand on religion. Honestly, it’s not an easy or straightforward question to answer. I was brought up in a family who did not discuss God or religion, and even looked down on the overly religious. Nevertheless, my upbringing was no less conservative nor sheltered. From an early age I’ve always read about science and my fascination for it remains strong to this day.

The concept of religion really hit me in secondary school when I did not fit into any peer group. I was attracted to the Christian community because it seemed wholesome and understanding when most kids were nasty and mean. Hence, I decided to join a Christian fellowship, not once, but twice. It was easy to depend on a higher being for guidance and assistance. However, I’ve always felt on the outs when it came to worship. In the back of my mind, science rather than religion could answer the curiosities I had about the natural world. Religion seemed dogmatic and restrictive, especially here where the Evangelical Christians are influential with their brand of conservatism. Being oppressed for being different from my peers taught me to be tolerant, understanding and liberal.

But I was humbled by the kindness that some Christians showed me, and I accepted Christ via the Christian Fellowship in 2006. 4 years later, where do I stand? The Christian friends that I cherished so much have mostly faded away. It made me think to myself, was I just a tool, a “pawn” to be converted so that they could receive a blessing from their “King”? The Christians I met after that seemed dubious, hypocritical and shallow.

I never really appreciated the love and kindness that seemed to radiate from Christians until I saw how selfish and self-preserving those without religion can be. This highlights the stereotypical image problem of the solitary and un-altruistic atheist. The Church, for all its troubles and dogma, is a huge charity that helps out the community. Sure, there are many charities that are secular in nature, but are atheists too busy bashing religion to create a closely connected community? This brand of aggressive atheism is just as forceful as the evangelical movement and will meet strong opposition rather than understanding. (Disclaimer: I’m a huge fan of Richard Dawkins’ works on evolution, but even I can agree that his aggressive atheism is sometimes obnoxious)

To me, religion is probably a by-product of our ever-expanding brain capacity. It is the earliest “science”, where humans tried to explain the world at a time when they did not have the advanced tools to study natural phenomena. Evidently, spirituality has evolved separately in most cultures worldwide. Religion is the organization of this spirituality, with an authoritarian power.

Organized religion is something that I am against. I think it is healthy for people to develop their own unbiased thoughts and opinions and this is suppressed by organized religion. Science promotes critical thinking and at its best constantly forces us to challenge our own thoughts. It is this challenge, looking at things from different angles, self-reflecting on my own thought processes that made me highly curious on what makes people tick.

My opinion is that the concept of God is a perfectly natural part of the evolution of any sentient being that has acquired a reasonable amount of intelligence. Without religion, human history would be radically different. Religion has played a huge role in the rise and fall of civilizations around the world, and scientific progress could not be achieved without civilization. As science progresses by leaps and bounds, is religion truly still relevant? Perhaps, but not in its present shape or form. Human beings have this existential need that can be satisfied by spirituality. But it can also be satisfied by a thorough and competent understanding of science. Currently I straddle these two notions. Spiritually I feel connected to the concept of God, yet I do not feel obliged to follow religion dogmatically. I am also aware that it is through science that I can truly understand the natural world – and this gives me the greatest satisfaction.

Hence, I would classify my beliefs as agnostic in nature, which is the belief that the truth value of the existence of God cannot be known. Agnosticism plays an important role in the philosophy of religion because it poses a serious challenge to those theologians and philosophers who argue that knowledge about gods is possible. If agnosticism can be successfully defended as being at least rational, then the efforts of many religious apologists (especially those who try to prove the existence of God) can be called into serious question, if not rejected entirely as a castle built upon sand.

I do not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible, but I do believe in the intrinsically good message that it has. Nevertheless, my liberal curiosities are entrenched in the scientific method rather than religion. I enjoy this unrestrained freedom of thought at the cost of feeling like an outsider in the conservative Christian community. Moreover, I do identify with the more secular minded community but this community is especially rare for there is a line between secularism and being just plain ignorant (most people I meet are unfortunately laodicean when it comes to religion and science). My hope is that atheists and agnostics can build a stronger community of mutual interests so that science can be promoted peacefully rather than forcefully. Although we are all made up of “selfish genes”, to act selfishly is shortsighted because I strongly believe our genes resulted in behaviour that is altruistic in nature.

Busting the myth of religion

Recently, Adam Savage of the Mythbusters gave a speech to the Harvard Humanist Society entitled “Food for the Eagle” where he deconstructs the notion that one cannot live morally without religion. He also makes an interesting point on prayer:

Prayer doesn’t work because someone out there is listening, it works because someone in here is listening. I’ve paid attention. I’ve pictured what I want to happen in my life. I’ve meditated extensively on my family, my future, my past actions and what did and didn’t work for me about them. I’ve looked hard at problems and thought hard about their solutions.

How true does that resonate with you? It’s worth reading the whole text, and it’s a treat to see a whole new facet of Adam Savage who most people think is just a goofy guy from Mythbusters.