Personal experience: phenomena far from argument

For Reason

The case for god on the basis of personal experience is not a credible argument yet for many centuries it has served the purpose of creating the effect or illusion of an argument. Believers around the globe have claimed to have felt, seen or heard the voice of god and many a times they act on such divine providence. Is this acceptable? But more importantly are their claims true? I hardly think so. For someone who is conditioned to accept or believe forces far greater than them any random piece of rubbish or any random event would in his/her perspective be interpreted unreasonably as divine or supernatural.

This attitude makes it quite easy for someone to thank god (not the doctor or science or reason or technology… the list goes on and on) after spending hours beneath the surgical knife. So now I’m sure you must be thinking “Then why do they do it?” What makes people not see the obvious but feel inclined (blinded by belief) to come up with stories of virgins and infants, angels and saints, fiery chariots and divided seas, cosmic forces of good and bad etc. This was something that troubled me for quite for sometime and I hope that it troubles you too. For if it doesn’t I promise you that the remaining words that I have poured onto paper are as useful as cat litter to you. To understand why people try so desperately to come up or create evidence for such fallacious oddities we must take into account the stalking process of socialization and its firm grip on our psyche. I must admit that the process of socialization has its share of let’s say virtue, innate virtue but when used by the narrow minded pompous manipulative god enforcers who take pride in their ignorance; this beautiful process becomes altogether diabolical and tends to glorify the idea of pure unadulterated belief and in worse cases belief in belief.

The inexistence of a god or for that matter any other phantom is something reason cannot prove neither can scientific enquiry, provided its objective. This is mainly because of the paradoxical fallaciousness it employs. Bertrand Russell in his article that went un-published for sometime “Is there a God?” wrote:

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Reason can never convince someone obsessed with goblins and ghosts that they do not exist. This is because the subject enjoys the company of belief and imagination but fails to understand the necessity of reason and empirical evidence. Now we all agree that pixies and goblins along with the whole colourful lot are just beings of fairy tales but it is interesting to see the same “critical thinkers” (regarding pixies and unicorns and leprechauns and fire breathing dragons… this list too goes on and on) profess the reality of virgin births, resurrection, after life, eternal damnation, intelligent designers, heaven hell, transubstantiation… (another unending list). So why do we believe in some fairy tales and not others? The most obvious answer is that we are told to believe by many socializing forces to believe and hence we believe, living in constant fear to swim against the tide, even when we make a complete fool of ourselves by not doing so. Even though this is true and a common phenomena it does not answer why we try substantiate such irrational and preposterous claims. Surely we all have great amounts of doubt and skepticism in us to make it through the night? To understand the “whys” I would like to introduce to you two influential factors, something I like to call the diabolical duo-imitation and anticipation.

The reason why we imitate and anticipate is thanks to socialization. It conditions our psyche, keeping it always on the look out to fit in, to go with the crowd, for the crowd is always right and if they are wrong, well its safer and wiser to go along just as the saying goes “if you can’t beat them, join them” This works well as far as survival is concerned in most cases unfortunately this contradicts reason. In modern day theocentric societies the presence of tele-evangelists and god men are evidently felt. They tell you think that is soothing to hear, they make rules to their comfort and change them when ever god asks them to, it is strange to see that most times god dictates something, it works well to the advantage of god enforcers. Lets just say it fattens their wallets to a certain point in which it is quite hard not to let out a smile and profess the good news, and this my friends is real bad news, not just for some individuals but to the collective unconscious that forms and in time shapes the thought process of generations to come. The healing presence of god, the love and the peace are what these men in white sell. This induces a sense of personal relationship and many a time comes to the rescue of theist when they try to debate with reason and logic. Much of the popularity religion enjoys is due to the subtle process of imitation. A child from the moment he is born is labeled in order to create an identity for him and this unquenchable thirst to stick to the constraints of this imposed identity is what makes one act in ways that are strange to reason. In religion, this is exploited as it right from the start makes it clear that its provisions are what are best suited for survival. And hence just to satisfy one longing of being right and acceptable one feels inclined to imitate the acts of others.

Popular tele-evangelist Benny Hinn is known to amuse and create moments of awe using his cheap theatrics. With a wave of the hand he showers his audience with mild doses of “the holy spirit” the subjects feel inclined fall to the ground when he waves his hand, not because their muscles fail to keep them standing but because they know deep down that all good pure people fall when in contact with the Lord’s presence. They do so in order to feel an unconscious innate sense of acceptance. At times this preacher even brings down to the ground, his whole choir comprising of a few hundreds of good souls. How does he do it? How can he fool so many people at the same time and since he “fools” quite a large group shouldn’t it be true, that he does have something in him, something extraordinary? No he doesn’t he just makes people imitate others. You see these people are conditioned to think that falling to the ground or bursting out in tears is acceptable and hence right and so when the first knee bends, other around too involuntarily take part in this mass delusion and therefore within seconds they find themselves flat on the grounds and this to them is amazing and hence something supernatural.  

The second trick theists have up their sleeves is anticipation. Imitation and anticipation overlap and coexist in most instances of insanity and mass delusion. During ones stay on earth one comes to learn many things, a lot of interesting things along with a bunch of amusing things too. We see sci-fi movies, read bible stories and what not and this shapes our understanding of reality. Even in our day there are many who claim to speak with the dead, they are just exercising their belief in delusion and should not be taken seriously. Consumerism has gone to such great heights that it has even arranged for, thanks to public interest, our dialogue with the dead. All you need is a board with letters and numbers, a candle and some empty spooky space to add to the overall effect. You have all of these and in seconds, voila, you have a spirit or a ghost of someone dead. Your hand is now guided by this force and it reveals juicy information to you, name, age, cause of death etc. supernatural isn’t it? No, plain rubbish, designed to fool the gullible. The only reason your hand moves is because you anticipate it to move, because otherwise your brain deep down knows that this phantom would not be able to covey what he/she wants. In short it is safe to say that in this case it to your imagination that you are speaking to. Your deliberate yet unconscious imagination is what speaks to you and same is the case with people who claim to have been visited by their respective gods or by the spokespersons of these busy deities(whom we now call saints). This also accounts for why UFOs most times are described as flying saucers that hover through the air at the speed of light, it is thanks to the very many hours we spend listening or/and watching sci-fi fiction. There is a good deal of imitation in the process of anticipation and a lot of anticipation in the process of imitation. What we see from this is not evidence to assert the existence of the super natural but the internal conflict we all face, a conflict which subsides in order to quench our thirst of acceptance.

The existence of objects, be it gods or ghouls on the basis of personal experience is fallacious as it can never be proved. What we can say about such claims is that it is a mere manifestation of our socialization, of the environment we grow in. To think that such unsubstantiated claims are worthy of attention is truly a fault. 

****************************