Have you ever been in a situation when a bunch of people with very different world views were actually getting along in some social media venue or other, and then someone totally commandeered the discussion into a debate of "Is religion totally right, or am I?!!!" All of a sudden all your friends lose focus and so do you, until everyone is sparring with a troll. This is more than a case of GroupThink vs. individuality: it's a case of people who are trying to learn from each other cooperatively, respecting difference, versus those who assume that theirs is the only valid opinion (trust me, I've been there).
...And thus does a perfectly awesome potential meeting of the minds in the comment on a Facebook post become a train-wreck where half the people bail for lack of Drama Attention Span, and the other half try to spar with the unwitting troll until most have given up and moved on to saner pastures. This is a case of "the loudest person in the room gets the
spotlight," not a problem of people who have religious faith or a lack
thereof. The problem, in short, is zealots (including anti-theist
zealots) who obnoxiously disregard basic logical and emotional considerations in their
approach to cosmological disagreements.
It's
perfectly normal to assume that you're right about a lot of stuff; let's
face it, that's how we sleep at night and get through the day with our
sanity more or less intact. Some people, however, take it upon
themselves to prove to anyone who will listen that their own
cosmological perspective is the supreme truth. This applies to
everything from whether there is a Heaven to whether Creationism is the
most factually accurate accounting of how everything got here. I mean,
really: everyone with half a brain knows that you either [1] Accept
carbon dating and dinosaur fossils or [2] Choose to have faith in the
Scriptural assertion that when God created the world several millennia
ago, He went to elaborate lengths in order to mess with our heads *ahem*
test our faith in Him. It's not that complex... it's not even a
debate, just fodder for people talking loudly at each other over social
media (a more likely candidate for "Proof that God is testing us" in my
opinion, but I digress).
Let's be realistic here: like most
matters of faith vs. skepticism, if someone is really convinced one way
or the other as to the Earth's approximate age, the chances of your
changing their mind are slim to none. Why even try, when there are
probably a lot of things you could teach one another without strife, and
ultimately, alienation? Yet some just can't let it go... even long
after the person' they're talking at has tuned out. These are tired,
obvious arguments that leave a bad taste in the mouth of anyone with a
sense of nuance, which is why a minority of extremely zealous people are
the only ones actively debating them any more.
Along with
browbeating, the other hallmark of a zealot is the presumption of
knowing Supreme Truths. They claim to know, either through God or
Science, the absolute truth on a wide range of cosmological matters,
even the total ineffables. An atheist zealot insists "There is no God"
or "People who believe in God are stupid" rather than asserting "I'm
trying to be as objective as possible. Barring proof, I cannot believe
in God" or "I can see what draws some people to religion, but it's not
for me, for these reasons."
Far more obnoxious than zealots'
smug dismissiveness, however, is their relentless reiteration of the
same "sermons," as if the entire world is their personal mock-debate
group. You'd think that people with all the answers would see that
beating someone over the head isn't always the most effective way to get
an idea across. Then again, maybe some do see it, in which case I must
pose the question: "If your real agenda isn't to convince people, why
go to all that trouble to explain yourself over and over?"
Zealots constantly alienate others by talking AT people rather than with
them, because they have no humility whatsoever about their own
fallibility. Whether they're preaching devout faith or "devout
skepticism," once zealots start pontificating, they cease to consider
the possibility that others might possess insights which they themselves
lack. It's a sad corner to paint yourself into... and the saddest part
is that die-hard zealots "win" argument after argument in their own
minds, without heed to the collateral losses. 99.9% of the world may not
acknowledge these daily victories, but that's just the price of
martyrdom.
No comments:
Post a Comment