Bertrand Russell’s darkness
Despite the bleakness of Bertrand Russell’s melancholy lament, the words he penned in his “Philosophical Essays” are at least honest and intellectually consistent with his atheism:
Brief and powerless is man’s life; on him and all his race the slow, sure doom falls pitiless and dark.
A meaningless end to a meaningless existence. A brief, powerless life followed by a slow, sure, pitiless, dark death. Unmitigated despair. That’s all that Bertrand Russell could find in life and in death.
He expressed a similar sentiment in his autobiography:
There is darkness without, and when I die there will be darkness within. There is no splendour, no vastness anywhere, only triviality for a moment, and then nothing. Why live in such a world? Why even die?
Indeed. For Russell, thoughts like these were not the product of morbid bouts of depression; they were the logical result of his carefully considered atheism.
Given the opportunity, how would you have responded to Russell’s agonizing hopelessness?
Barry Wallace
theoparadox
pijohnson
I’d have pointed out that his melancholy was founded on a false view of identity.
You can identify with nothingness, and be a nihilist.
You can identify with an eternal soul.
You can identify with a mortal soul – and feel the inevitable onset of mortality as a great weight.
This is leaving out a very obvious (and far grander) solution:
You can identify with everything: ‘Self’ and ‘Other’ are metaphors only. Then the question of mortality or immortality is dissolved entirely, because the identity is not limited to the Platonic atomism of the spirit that is so intrinsically insinuated throughout our day-to-day discourse.
Becoming aware of Bertrand’s personal & family history of depression I remember thinking how one could mesh that handicap with all of the pursuits he took on….even to the point of a Nobel prize. Having some experience with depression myself I understand the difficulty in pressing on, especially in academia.
Yet to your question – Bertrand was a radical, imprisioned for refusing to go to war. People who are willing to suffer for thier beliefs are hardly swayed by words alone….but radicals can idetify with other radicals (Jesus). Add to that he was a world renowned mathematision and we can quickly assume he was not keen to formulas that include the factor = FAITH. However, once examined, atheism also takes a great deal of faith…
So even this person could be swayed by someone with a real testimony, true passion and a gifted ability to communicate the message of hope found in Christ. In short I would introduce him to the life and works of William Cowper…who, after serveral attempts of depression aided suicide, was able to write:
Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take,
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy, and shall break
In blessings on your head
Judge not the lord by feeble sense,
But trust him for his grace;
behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face
Gets me every time….
“A meaningless end to a meaningless existence. A brief, powerless life followed by a slow, sure, pitiless, dark death. Unmitigated despair. That’s all that Bertrand Russell could find in life and in death.” From one passage you profess to know about Russell’s whole life from beginning to end. Insightful. I’d like to see the citation (I would not put it above people to quote mine Russell when it suits them…).
“For Russell, thoughts like these were not the product of morbid bouts of depression; they were the logical result of his carefully considered atheism.” Or perhaps he suffered from depression which generated such thoughts. I am fortunate in that I don’t. suffer from debilitating mental illness. Nor has my own carefully-considered lead me to such thoughts. And depression will lead to such thoughts in the religious as much as the non-religious, a fact you conveniently ignore.
Without religion I have a beautiful wife, a wonderful home, a fantastic career…. I wonder if you will ever use my example and show that atheists are just like everybody else. I doubt it. If you’re going to paint all atheists in a monochromatic fashion, you’ve already used that one tube of pigment. It doesn’t fit into this simplistic pigeon-holing exercise you’ve got going. Atheism = despair. I don’t seem to have ever got the memo.
Even so, according to you, all Russell had to do was believe and he was cured of his despair. But he could not. Why? Because he knew it wouldn’t (placebos are only temporary) and he knew his position was correct. I would do as he did – press on. Talk to my family, my friends. (Yes, we have both!)
And Christians think they suffer. Whatever.
Get to know an atheist before you profess to understand them, rather than creating caricatures. It is ignorance such as this that leads to a lack of understanding. A lack of understanding leads to distrust. Distrust leads to violence. I urge you to get to know atheists and what they believe. Contrary to the first commenter (yet another ignorant of atheists), I know many atheists and none of them are nihilists. We believe in many things, as many as you – save one.
Whether you agree with him or not, Russell was a colorful genius. I celebrate his life just as I hope those that know me celebrate mine when I’m gone.
I want to begin by thanking you for taking the time to reply to my brief post. I think there are actually several things that we would agree on. We agree that Bertrand Russell was a brilliant man. We both respect Russell, although probably for different reasons. I respect him for the fact that he was honest and, in some sense at least, courageous. He believed that both life and death were absurd, and he embraced the absurdity that he saw with eyes wide open. And I assume that we both believe that all men should be treated with kindness and respect, whether we agree with them or not.
Although it’s not clearly stated by either of us, I think we would agree that Russell was a flawed man (as we all are). We agree that no one, Christian or otherwise, is exempt from bouts of depression or other debilitating mental illnesses, although I maintain that Russell was not mentally ill, but merely following his carefully considered convictions to their logical conclusion. And we agree that a person can be an atheist and be quite happy and well-adjusted, as you are. I don’t think, in any of those matters, I implied otherwise; but if I did, I apologize.
To further clarify a couple of things, I also had no intention of painting all atheists with a broad monochromatic brush. I no more believe that all atheists think alike than I do that all Christians think alike. There was also no intent on my part to dehumanize anyone–neither Russell himself, nor atheists in general. For whatever it’s worth, I’ve been around for quite a few years, and over the course of those years I’ve had friendly relationships and respectful conversations with the few agnostics and atheists that I’ve met.
Finally, it’s certainly possible that I’ve taken Russell’s statements out of context, but I don’t think so. The first quote in my post is from his essay “A Free Man’s Worship” which can be read online here. The second excerpt is from his autobiography, and can be previewed in its original context here. I would encourage everyone reading this post to read Russell’s work for themselves and evaluate its merits.
Thanks again for visiting. I do hope you’ll continue to participate in this discussion, and do so with an open heart and mind. I wish you the best.
Shamelessly Atheistic:
Thank you for commenting on this post. You accuse Barry of painting all atheists in a monochromatic fashion, yet you write, “And Christians think they suffer. Whatever.” Are you not guilty of doing the same with that glib statement? I certainly don’t think I’ve suffered for my faith at this point. I’ve not been imprisoned or tortured or anything like that. So, I wonder, are you willing to carry on a discussion as your comments imply? I certainly hope so. I agree with you, by the way, that not all atheists are unhappy, etc. I think there are many happy atheists, such as yourself.
I obviously disagree, however, that belief is a temporary placebo. I have a hope and evidence for that hope.
I’m curious, what is your definition of nihilism? Why is it that you aren’t a nihilist?
I hope you’ll discuss these things.
James
You are correct. I was being a bit glib. My apologies. That being said, however, I have heard many Christians spout this nonsense regardless that they have never been imprisoned, tortured, etc. These are the same people that are upset when they try to entrench religious principles in secular institutions even though there is a significant portion of the population that does not adhere to them. If you want to know where the so-called ‘New Atheism’ (what, there’s a new way not to believe now?) came from, that’s it, not 9/11 (though that did spur atheists on).
As I say below to the person who has said everything but that I have horns on my head, I was speaking of the placebo effect in the medical sense. Belief can only bring temporary relief from something like depression, since it does not treat the underlying cause. I have no stats to back it up, but I would be surprised to find that the incidence of something like depression is greater in the non-belief section. (Ooops. I looked it up just now. Depression is actually more likely in the religious group. Not sure why. From Maselko, Gillman and Buka, Psychol Med 6:1-9 (2008).) I do not doubt that belief can be a great comfort to people in times of crisis. But it is not the only source, and I get my strength elsewhere, from friends and family, and I’m not exactly a weak person to begin with. Admittedly, the worst that’s happened to me on an emotional level in the last number of years was when my cat died. Pretty wimpy by most standards, but I was very attached to my cat and my wife helped me through that.
Russell had no intellectual reason for which to believe (it’s not like turning on a light switch), and so would never work for him. I am the same. For myself, I see it as a false hope. There is simply no good evidence that it is anything else. So we don’t even consider going that direction. It’s like taking a sugar pill and knowing it’s a sugar pill. No disrespect intended, here. That’s just how we see it.
Now on to the question of questions. I have to hand it to you, this is the best question I have had in a long time. Why am I not a nihilist? I have spent so much time considering the evidence that we are not nihilists that I haven’t stopped to consider why we are not nihilists. The main reason I suppose is that I don’t think answering the question ‘why” is as important as determining that we don’t. And the evidence is quite convincing that we are not. The end results of nihilism that are usually attributed to it are just not seen. For instance, nihilism in the existential sense (we need to be clear here) means that there is no meaning, purpose or intrinsic value to life. This is the definition I think you are referring to.
If I had a nickel for every believer that asked “if there is no purpose to life, why get out of bed?”, I’d be a very, VERY rich man. My usual response is that if we atheists are so depressed, why are we still around? Why haven’t we pulled the trigger on ourselves? The truth is, I get up every morning just for the new experiences I know (barring some unforeseen nastiness) I will have that day. I mean, if you get bogged down worrying about death all the time, you forget to live life. I’d rival Bill Gates worth if in addition to the other one I had another nickel for every time someone asks, “Haven’t you thought about your death?” Well, since I can’t know what happens (or even imagine it, since it is outside of our experience save for that one time in the future), it’s rather moot. Why miss out on the one life we have because I am always frightened about my unavoidable death? Rather a cowardly viewpoint, I think.
There is also moral relativism as a logical conclusion of nihilism. Certainly, morality is not absolute. Even the morality Christians hold as being such has changed drastically with time. One need only look at theology over history to see that. I can come up with so many counter-examples as to make the notion of an absolute morality absurd. The definition of ‘murder’ is my favorite. It hasn’t always meant what we now think it means. But morality is not an either or proposition, whether relative or absolute. Modern behavioral sciences has shown that morality is innate, or at least the machinery for performing moral calculus is, and arose through the rise of the social survival strategy. All social mammalian species demonstrate at least some protomoral behavior. Individual members of a group could not interact co-operatively without such rules developing. Higher primates display all the same moral behavior types that we do, without exception.
The moral boundaries are set by the current moral zeitgeist. You learn these boundaries as you grow up. Spanking does provide a valuable service. This zeitgeist changes with time and culture and the evidence is very clear on this. When given hypothetical situations, the choices are the same across religions and even for those without belief. Being religious is simply not a requirement for either knowing what is good and what is bad, or acting good or bad. In essence, even if atheists were nihilists, while moral relativism is a logical conclusion, it is not a necessary conclusion and simply does not happen.
So I don’t believe in an absolute purpose to life. But there is purpose on many levels. At the DNA level, the purpose for genes is to be passed on to the next generation. I know that won’t satisfy you. It doesn’t satisfy me, either, except I know that it is true. You and I both want to know the purpose of “ME” (or “YOU” if it’s you). And this is the most difficult part of answering your question. And I’m not wholly certain that there is a purpose other than given by what has guided me my whole life – my intellect, my understanding of right and wrong and my desire to be more than I am now. But if there is a purpose, it is to live my life in such a way as to be able to look back and be satisfied with my choices. So far, I have few regrets. Most of those last come from not giving myself enough credit and aiming higher. Fortunately, other people saw my worth (career-wise) and snatched me up, and for that I’m greatful. In part, the fault lies in being an only-born (very Type A perfectionist), though that’s kind of a cop-out since one’s birth order does not determine character in a fixed manner. But I demand more of myself than I do other people, which makes me my own harshest critic. Regardless of what you think of how I have defined purpose for myself, it is most certainly not the philosophy of a nihilist.
There is no question that I reject that life does not hold intrinsic value. If I held this view, I would not care what happens to anyone, including myself. But I do. I’m outraged at human suffering and to be quite honest, these people don’t need bibles but real tangible help. I’m none too happy with the pope, either. His having suddenly become an expert in STDs and proclaiming that condoms aren’t effective in stopping the spread of HIV is going to lead to the deaths of millions. And I’m outraged by that. Why would I be outraged if I were a nihilist? It doesn’t matter in the end, right? And I have risked life and limb to aid someone (a rock climbing incident and I nearly broke both my heels in a fall at the end of it). Why would I risk my own neck (I was lucky – I could easily have been killed or worse) if I thought that there was no value in life?
Please do not construe discussion as an opportunity to convert. Conversion is rather a distasteful thing to most atheists (I say most – there are those who have no problem with this). Sorry for the suspicion, as you seem generally interested, but I’ve been hit on like that before and I do not like it. My sole purpose for coming here is the hope that people will take their misguided view as to what and who atheists are (and it is clear that it is misguided), measure them against real atheists and maybe realize that we aren’t the scary monsters under the bed that Christians all too often think we are. Remember, there is no bar to holding public office, for instance that is more effective than being an atheist. They rate even lower than homosexuals (who I am not afraid of either, having some in my circle of friends). That’s pretty strong evidence that Christians and other religious groups don’t view atheists very highly, and as a result, atheists do not trust the religious to not run roughshod over them.
I don’t know that I answered your question well, only that we do not do what nihilists supposedly do. But I tried.
“Atheism = despair” No sir, I think the Christian point of view is a simple acknowledgement that life provides despair organically, in doses, even before you develop your world view. Atheism is just one response to this natural occurrence.
“all Russell had to do was believe and he was cured of his despair.” No sir, but his despair would be seen in a different context, as part of a larger condition. The pursuit of a remedy for the larger condition is at the heart of the power of this belief.
“placebos are only temporary..” Surely a man as well read and intelligent as you is not trying to categorize the comfort that millions of lives have experience, over thousands of years as a “temporary placebo”. A placebo would have easily been exposed well before the first Christian martyr was ever recorded. A placebo would have never soothed my mother, as it so sufficiently did, as she battled cancer over many years (yes, we have family too). Temporary placebos do not change lives, nations or the course of history. Do you also see Islam as the “pet rock” of religions?
“Without religion I have a beautiful wife, a wonderful home, a fantastic career…. I wonder if you will ever use my example and show that atheists are just like everybody else.” With religion I have all those things as do many people I suspect you would find misguided…George Bush to David Duke…take your pick. The dynamics of one’s outward appearance is a poor barometer for the conditions of one’s contentment with self or even if someone is a good person, father or neighbor. I could use your example very easily as someone who traveled through life in comfortable bliss, with all the pieces in place and yet ask the question, “what if I was wrong” a split second before you die.
Most of us who explore the path beyond atheism have the courage to ask that question well before we are faced with death’s door. Please know that most every Christian I have ever talked too, when pressed, honestly examined atheism as a possibility…along with other philosophies and religions. If your are of the opinion that we are all “mind numb robots” who have sadly fallen under the guise of a charismatic preacher would serve you poorly if you want an honest examination of the issue. Largely we are above average intelligence, well read and more introspective than the norm. We have spent years wrestling with an honest evaluation of who & what we are and have come to the conclusion that, even on our best day ,we are capable of devastating evil…even if that evil means that we simply fail to acknowledge our creator and view our creator in the true light of what He is and what He is worth. We see ourselves in need of forgiveness because we fail to do this adequately and ,moreover, are incapable of doing this adequately.
How lonely it must be for one to have all the answers and to be capable of self-perfection. In what company could he bear to keep?
With love, but without proof, I must state as fact that, like me, you are eternal. My wish is that you come to this conclusion and travel a little further down the path. It’s hard, it’s uncertain, but it is rewarding and those of us who you insult and see as misguided and ignorant will be the first to step up and love you through the process….
@rush5162
“Surely a man as well read and intelligent as you is not trying to categorize the comfort that millions of lives have experience, over thousands of years as a “temporary placebo”.” Sure I do. I also recognize the great harm religion can do to societies. History is replete with sectarian violence, little more than tribal warfare on a grand scale. I’m glad it gave your mother comfort. But I can tell you it would be of false comfort to me. There are other ways to be comforted that do not require belief in a deity. What I meant when I said it was a placebo effect was in the strict sense of the word – a depressed person would feel better for a little while, but would do nothing to cure the underlying condition and depression invariably returns.
“Most of us who explore the path beyond atheism have the courage to ask that question well before we are faced with death’s door.” Excuse me? What makes you think I haven’t? Just because I do nor subscribe to your belief system means I haven’t asked those questions? That’s incredibly presumptuous of you, and as it happens, INCREDIBLY WRONG. It would be intellectually irresponsible to never ask myself the question “what if I’m wrong.” I continually challenge my beliefs and occasionally change them when new information demands I do so. Not on this one though. Since no one has ever come back from being dead, no new information exists. In fact, no information at all exists. To live one’s life on the basis of something which has nothing I would call evidence going for it quite frankly is not my idea of an enlightened path. Nor is acting out of fear of punishment/expectation of reward at all a noble reason to act for what we call ‘good’, particularly when there are already good reasons to act in that manner.
This smacks of Pascal’s Wager, a theistic argument that has been demolished many times over and was rather unworthy of Blaise. My own view on the Wager is that if I am wrong, at least I had this life in which to do what I feel is the way it should be lived. If you are wrong, you’ve had the one life stolen from you by a lie when you didn’t have to allow it to happen. In other words, everything.
“Largely we are above average intelligence, well read and more introspective than the norm. ” Actually, it’s been shown in the literature that this is not true at all. While it is a trend and not an absolute predictor, religious people tend to be less educated and with lower IQ. (See for example, Lynn, Harvey and Nyborg, Intelligence 37:11-15 (2008)) Note: This does not mean that religious people are uneducated and dumb! It is a trend, not a predictor. I just want to get that straight before I get mauled for something I didn’t say.
“The dynamics of one’s outward appearance is a poor barometer for the conditions of one’s contentment with self or even if someone is a good person, father or neighbor.” I hope I’m wrong, but my guess is that you don’t think atheists are capable of this. If I’m right, we have nothing to say to one another. As it happens, I actually am a happy person, though that wouldn’t fit into your world view so I don’t expect you to believe it. When it snows, I shovel the walks for each house on either side because the owners are elderly and there is no way I would feel right about letting them do that on their own. But then that probably doesn’t fit into the ‘evil atheist’ caricature again.
“…even if that evil means that we simply fail to acknowledge our creator and view our creator in the true light of what He is and what He is worth.” So, I’m automatically evil. Thanks.
“Please know that most every Christian I have ever talked too, when pressed, honestly examined atheism as a possibility…” And in general, Christians (and here I can paint such people with broad brush – I have known many Christians and far too many of them misunderstand atheism).
“How lonely it must be for one to have all the answers and to be capable of self-perfection.” Case in point. No atheist would say or believe such a thing, and I would say most are not at all lonely, being very personable people. Since 15% of Americans do not believe in a personal god, I would bet that you have met many and went away with a positive feeling towards them.
I’m sorry, but this statement is pure prejudice. You make my case for me that Christians don’t understand atheism. And ALL of you here have demonstrated that you won’t even bother to try thinking outside the box. This is pointless. ” those of us who you insult and see as misguided and ignorant will be the first to step up and love you through the process….” It is not an insult to call you ignorant and misguided when by your own words you demonstrate that you are both. It is simply a statement of fact. I’m massively disappointed.
Dear Atheist Dude,
You believe that a few molecules got it on, Milena ago, and zoink, here you are today. I, on the other hand, believe that this was all created by God.
You seem to be a fairly intelligent guy, albeit hiding in anonymity [Shamelessly Atheist], but here are a few things I have learned over the years. Oh, you probably aren’t going to like this. But….here we go:
#1 – in my view, it does us absolutely no good to debate polar opposites. You have your point of view, your heart is clearly one that delights in the clanging of mental swords. When a reasonable intellect, like yours, is combined with a hard heart, like yours, then all that is likely to occur is the banging of our swords.
#2 – this is going to sound like complete poppycock to you, but here is the real deal. You do not understand because God has chosen not to reveal the truth to you. I know, I know…I can hear your blood boiling now. But neither of us are going to prove our points through the intellect. You can’t prove horny molecules, and I can’t completely prove the existence of God. Both of us have faith in our positions. I am going to pray that God might reveal himself to you, and you….well…I have no idea, are you going to pray to horny molecules? Or…perhaps you couldn’t give a rip what happens to me in eternity. Can’t say.
#3 – Sorry, I am going to smack you again, a bit. I hope you don’t mind. Mr. Atheist Dude, you are one proud son of a gun. There is absolutely no humility in your spirit whatsoever. You are absolutely convinced that you have all of life’s answers. Rest assured, a healthy dose of pain, from this fallen world, has shattered many a proud man. I pray that you might not have this road to tread. God has told us that he desires to be known. Therefore, if he is real, and you have the slightest bit of humility, you might simply say, “Ok God, if you are real, then please show yourself to me, help me understand.” If you continue with your current path of pride, God just might decide to hand you a holy swirlee to bring you to your knees, or worse, God forbid, he may simply decide to leave you in the dark. If I am right, and you are wrong, then my friend, you are standing with your middle finger proudly in God’s face. Not a good position to be in.
Therefore, I am not going to debate you. I would simply ask that you consider these words from Holy God, through the lips of Isaiah:
“Turn to me and be saved,
all the ends of the earth!
For I am God, and there is no other.
23 By myself I have sworn;
from my mouth has gone out in righteousness
a word that shall not return:
‘To me every knee shall bow,
every tongue shall swear allegiance.’ [4]
24 “Only in the Lord, it shall be said of me,
are righteousness and strength;
to him shall come and be ashamed
all who were incensed against him.
I don’t know dude, your horny molecules don’t have much to say. However, if this is true, and I recommend you make absolutely certain that it isn’t, you might humble yourself, just a bit, and give the Bible a serious read.
The Book of John was penned for just such a purpose, so that you might believe. Why not spend a month of your life, and put some serious study in this book?
Who knows, if you humble yourself, and open the door just the slightest bit, God might have mercy on you, and make himself known to you.
I pray he does.
Friend, your battle isn’t with me. Further discussion, and sword battle between you and I, is pointless. I have said my piece. I pray that you will consider it in the privacy of your bed.
I will be praying for you tonight, and I pray that God might break through that thick, hard heart, and show himself to you.
David Porter
“I’m massively disappointed.” I’m afraid that this is sign of things to come.
These types of debates are typicaly never won or lost without the aid of hindsight, so I do not see the need to go much further. You seem like a nice enough guy and the chances are good that I would like you personally. However, from my stand-point the issue is much larger than you and I on a personal level. Therefore, please do not read into any of my comments that I was singling you out as different from anyone who is without God in their life. I have no trouble believing you are a good father and a warm neighbor.
However, the truth is I do think your evil, but then again I am too. It’s not who we are but what. That’s the point my friend. Redemption is a silly notion without it’s presense. I also know how that sounds, it’s harsh and makes it difficult to take anything else I say seriously…i get it. I also get the fact that you can refute most anything I have to say, contrary to your point of view, and back it up with some form of data published in secular academia. And for me, I have little use for eternal guidence from Kierkegaard or his ilk. So we will have to agree to disagree. There will be no converstions here today.
Yet, for future refernce please know that there is a world full of individuals who have had a supernatural, heart melting encounter that changed them forever. I’m not big on “religious supernatural experiences”, ala miraculous healings and NDE’s, but since this experience is definatley an encounter with something outside of ourselves I feel complelled to stay true to the term supernatual. You might see this as something along the lines of a Bigfoot sighting, but for us it was more…so much more. Our desire to share this comes from a place of good will and with the aim to share joy. Sometimes it as simple as “one begger showing another where he found bread”. Granted, this does not describe a good portion of the religious world. Many of us today sit in our pews on Sunday morning and feel unconnected to many of those around us. You might be surprised to know many of us are “massivley disappointed” in the state of the Church and those who claim to represent it. Althought the trend is changing, but for most of America’s history there was a positive light that shined on those who professed the Christian faith and was able to be counted as a member of a church. As a result, many joined our ranks in name only, with selfish or other agendas and some grew into leadership postions over the years. This has caused unmeasurable harm to both the true Chritian body and It’s efforts to be an appealing alternative to indifference towards God. In truth, we have all failed at times to live our lives in a manner that is appealing to the unbeliving world…as perhaps I have with my poor choice of words and general tone here in these post. I ask your forgivness and please know that what I really wanted was not to offend your senses, but to hopefully convict your heart. I wish you well.
SA:
I’m out of town right now, but plan on responding to your very thoughtful reply when I get back home. Please give me a few days. Thanks for your patience.
James
Shamelessly Atheist,
I hesitate to ask this (because I know it sounds like a loaded question), but I do have an honest question. Barry’s original post was making the point that Russell, at least in the two quotes that he cited, seemed hopeless. He had carried his worldview to its logical conclusion and was left with only despair. Barry then asked the question: ‘how would you have responded to Russell’s agonizing hopelessness?’ Christians (myself included) would seemingly respond with the hope they find in the gospel, namely that we are created by God, have sinned against Him, and He has sent His Son to pay for our sins and give us new (eternal) life by dying for our sins and being raised again. Obviously you disagree with this and see it as only a temporary (placebo) fix for Russell’s depression, which is consistent with what you believe (as did Russell). So then, as an atheist who does not struggle with despression and seemingly disagree’s with Russell’s hopeless logical conclusions to atheism, how would you have responded to Russell’s agonizing hopelessness? You have said that you are not sure that Russell was in fact so hopeless (which may indeed be true), but still, how would you respond to an atheist who did find the logical conclusions to their worldview as hopeless? Are all of these people simply suffering from mental illness?
Again, I know it seems like a loaded question, but I really am curious. And if you have already answered this in your comments and I missed it, could you point it out? Thanks for your time,
wm
This is quite a discussion. I’ll just answer Barry’s original question, then add a couple of personal experiences that pertain to the discussion above.
To Russell, I’d have suggested a full medical eval. for possible depression or other mental illness. Pending the results of that, supportive friendship, good conversation, and activity in the manner of his choice, any one of which might have lifted his hopelessness a bit. OTOH, some people are fundamentally pessimistic, risk-adverse, and introverted, so Russell’s outlook may have tended toward hopeless from early in life. I’m not an expert on the man’s life; I’ve only read his major works.
As for being an atheist and dealing with life’s challenges, I’ve had more than many people (being older helps in this area). Most of my family is dead, many of my friends died or are sick, etc.
Years back I was married to a woman (in her late 20s) who became very sick, required multiple surgeries in a period of two years, and piles of meds daily. Often I had to rush her to the ER where docs and techs would drop everything to save her life. I lost days or weeks worth of sleep, had to rearrange my work schedule, and essentially give up my personal life while taking care of her.
Doing something like this is very hard. But I stayed focused on the task at hand, did everything I could to help her and her caregivers, and remained pragmatic and realistic about the situation. I was an atheist long before I married her, and remained one throughout and still am. I don’t know why. That’s just how I see and feel things are.
I’m deliberately leaving out the end of the story because it doesn’t matter. My work and effort on behalf of my wife was its own reward. The knowledge that I was helping to save or preserve life was compelling and meaningful. In the end, there was no other reward or benefit for me.
Hope versus hopelessness seem to have a lot to do with the situation and an individual’s personality traits. In other words, each of us will experience hope/hopelessness in different, possibly unique, ways.
Daniel,
Thanks for stopping by and taking the time to think about the question. Thanks also for sharing a very personal and touching story, and for the cordial tone of your comment. I hope you’ll continue to participate in the discussion.
SA:
First, you and I agree that Christians in America are not presently being persecuted for their faith. I think it would be much more helpful if the individuals of which are speaking would stop complaining of being persecuted, and understand the difference between that and marginalization.
Second, I think we may agree that depression at times may be due to a medical/physical condition. I also think one’s beliefs affect if one is depressed. I have no doubt that there are “believers” who suffer from depression, considering their beliefs. Quite frankly, many of the beliefs held by some evangelicals are far removed from historic Christianity and the gospel. They get caught in a cycle of trying to make themselves acceptable to God rather than rejoicing in what God has done for sinners through Christ. I’m glad that to hear you admit that belief can be a great comfort to people in times of crisis, and also glad that you receive strength from your friends and family. I’m sorry about your cat, honestly. Pets can become just like family members, can’t they? God has been gracious in giving us such wonderful gifts!
Third, ultimately the question is not whether or not Christianity/religion is useful, but whether or not it is true. You state Russell had no intellectual reason to believe, and that you are the same. I contend that there are many intellectual reasons to believe. Reasons related to science, history and religion in particular. If Christianity were simply a sugar pill, I’d have no reason to take it. In fact, I’d reject it.
Fourth, regarding nihilism, we agree on the basic definition. I would add to it (as is generally done) that “values” are generally invented because there are no absolutes (from the nihilist viewpoint, that is). What is the evidence of which you speak of not being nihilists? I have no doubt (unlike some of my fellow Christians) that you have a purpose/reason to get out of bed every morning, whether new experiences or other things. I contend, in fact, that the basic purpose of an atheist’s existence is to survive the day and to live fully for self. Is that a fair statement? I see no difference between moderns and ancient in this regard. The Apostle Paul confronted the same forms of philosophy we see today – Stoicism, Epicureanism, etc. They were (as we essentially are today) dealing with the meaning of life. I do believe even atheists have a philosophy related to the meaning of life. I consider what you have to say, for example, and see that your meaning of life revolves around experience. You mention friends and family. I think you are essentially an Epicurean. Is that a fair assessment?
We disagree as to moral absolutes. How do you view Christian morality as changing drastically with time? I contend Christian absolutes remain although some professing the faith have, throughout history, departed from those absolutes. Murder is murder, but murder is not equivalent to killing. Do you want to chase that one? I agree completely that morality is innate. In fact, I view this as evidence of a Creator.
If moral boundaries are set by the current moral zeitgeist, is that really morality? Or is it simply “mob rule” — nothing more than moral relativism? I contend this is exactly what it is – moral relativism. And, if there is no standard or absolute, then what right does somebody else have in telling me what to do or not to do, what is good or evil? I do agree with you that being religious is not a requirement for knowing good and evil. Again, I believe the Creator has instilled that within everyone.
Why do you believe life holds intrinsic value? Why are you outraged at human suffering? I don’t doubt at all that you believe there is value in life, I just wonder why you do.
Fifth, I might give you a nickel and ask about if you’ve thought about if there is anything after death. From the Christian perspective, of course, we have confessed for millennia that after death comes the judgment – that all will stand before God and give an account of their lives. This aspect was very much included in the apostolic proclamation. I wouldn’t ask you to miss out on this life and be frightened about the inevitable, but I would ask you to consider whether or not there is something after death. Of course, this goes back to whether or not there is any evidence that God exists. I contend He does. Why do you contend He does not?
Last, I certainly don’t believe you are a monster or anything like that. In fact, my Christian beliefs call for me to respect you. So, I hope you feel respected in our discussion. I appreciate the time you are taking to speak about these things.
James
SA:
This is a response to some of the things you wrote to Rush…
You declare religion can do great harm to societies and that history is replete with sectarian violence. I admit that history is replete with such. In fact, it is a shameful that some have gone to war in the name of Christ. This is certainly not His teaching. He told Pilate that His Kingdom was not of this world, for if it was, His followers would rise up and fight. This is the reason that hospitals, orphanages and educational institutions have been established in His name all over the globe and done a great deal of good. It seems you’ve rejected religion as being harmful, yet you’ve not considered the harm done by atheism. Millions were slaughtered – not in war, but exterminated – in Soviet Russia. Nazism, established upon the philosophies of Nietzsche and Darwin, also exterminated millions.
I have no doubt you’ve considered matters related to death, etc. I’m glad you’ve had the courage to ask, “What if I’m wrong?” You declare no one has ever come back from being dead, yet I contend the evidence is contrary to that declaration. Why couldn’t the authorities produce the corpse of Christ? Since when have followers of a permanently deceased rabbi turned the world upside down? No information exists? Reading secular historians of the time (not just the biblical documents), there is no doubt Jesus Christ existed and no doubt what happened with His followers.
I don’t hold to Paschal’s Wager, but if I you understand it correctly, then how can you say it has been demolished? How have Christians wasted their lives? Was it when they established hospitals and orphanages and schools? Was it when they sought to do good to others (as you have done yourself)? His whole point was that if there were no after-life/judgment, then at least this life was used for good. Far from having a life stolen, my life has been improved by being a better husband, father, employee, etc. You seem to get irritated when others say your life is meaningless, etc., so perhaps you should employ your own words regarding Christians more carefully. If we are content in our lives, and if our supposed “lie” helps us to act more charitably in our relationships and more responsibly in our employment, then should our belief bother you?
SA, like I’ve stated before, I do believe you are a happy atheist and you very much fit into my worldview. That is, my worldview gives an explanation for your rejection of God and your happiness. I would add that I don’t believe you are evil because you are an atheist, but I do believe that you are sinful – as are all people, including all of us Christians. I believe sin is the transgression of God’s moral absolutes. I realize no one likes to be called a sinner. Nonetheless, at least give me credit for declaring without hesitation that I am one as well. I believe all of the wars and all of the suffering this world has ever experienced and is experiencing now is a result of sin. Sin is essentially selfish pride. Like you, I’m angry when I see suffering. I hate it, because I know why it exists. However, I have a hope that God – who is both just and merciful – will set all things right. In other words, my worldview gives me both understanding and hope in this world.
Will I think outside the box? Well, I’m quite content in my box, yet I have no problem with peeking outside of it and discussing such things with folks such as yourself. I hope you don’t really mean that everyone who has commented here isn’t bothering to do such. I’m honestly trying to carry on an intelligent (and dare I say, polite) conversation with you. My aim is to carry on a thoughtful discussion so that you might see there are credible reasons why we Christians believe, while at the same time demonstrating that you are a person worthy of being treated with dignity and respect. If you think I’m ignorant and misguided, that’s fine, but please permit me to think you may be misguided as well (I certainly don’t think you are ignorant, however).
James
@Barry,James and others here.
I could be wrong but it appears as if we have lost SA. As I reviewed the posts here in this thread, a curious thought occurred. Although SA was a sharp, resolute commenter I doubt he was anything close to what this community would have experienced if Bertrand himself was commenting. He defiantly would have chewed me up and left me holding my Bible by a dangling book mark.
Food for thought….
It’s true that some come close minded & simply to argue, but at the same time I can’t help but think of men like the slave trading John Newton and the serial killing Jeffery Dahmer and that they were reached by some vessel which lead then to Christ. Could it ever had been me? Would I have been a hindrance? Easy my Calvinist friends… Job 42:2. “I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted… ” Obviously I’m not wondering if my buffoonery is greater than the work of
God’s Spirit when It’s sites are set for the heart of the lost….but is anybody else feeling this? Was there enough love dripping from our words that he was drawn simply by the spirit in which we reached out even if it what we said didn’t jive with his intellectual conclusions? Is it possible we get so protectionist with our doctrines that we lose sight of the fact that ultimately we are dealing with people and not positions?
During a pastor’s conference, John Piper commented on one of the mistakes many pastors make. His points was that they tend to forget how it took them 10-20-30 years to fully grasp what their own theological beliefs are, but when they preach it they can’t understand why the folks in the seats continue to wrestle with it for a period of time. How many of us are still putting the finer points on our thoughts about the “full sovereignty of God in man’s affairs” and somehow we are surprised at an atheist’s dismissal of the idea.
Ok ok, actually I’m wagging my finger at myself and you guys are getting to watch. I mean come on…I called the guy evil. What was I thinking? He was going to come back and say, ” You know…your right I never thought of that ! “. Geesh… Next time I think I will start out sounding more like John Lennon than John Calvin.
“All you need is love……..
Rush:
We can wait patiently and see whether or not our friend, SA, returns. I certainly hope he does.
You are right to bring up our responsibility in dealing kindly and graciously with others, especially non-Christians. While we should not be concerned when the cross of Christ proves to be an offense to others, we should never be guilty of being offensive ourselves. Consider how the Apostle Paul spoke to his listeners throughout the Book of Acts, etc. He was respectful. We should be so as well. Yes, Rush, remember that we are dealing with people and that we should treat them as those made in the imago Dei – the image of God.
I’m not wagging my finger at you, just agreeing with your finger as it wags at you.
I suggest you apologize and let SA know something – that you are one who is simul justus et peccator – simultaneously justified and sinful. Point to the reality of the cross of Christ, admitting your own shortcomings while lauding His perfections and work.
James
Reading sentiments like this saddens me. I felt the same after discussing The Road with some friends, and they argued that the boy represents hope (a counter argument to the fact that I didn’t like the story because there was no hope). Oh, how can one see that as hope when they have tasted REAL hope?