I’ve been somewhat amused at the buffoonery that has unfolded on News24 around the unending debate—and one of the few debates worth having. You know, the one about bullshit VS fact, or rather religion VS reality?
The imprecision of memory again makes its presence known to me as I cannot recall where I learned the following saying, but here it is: ‘A crowd has the intelligence of a 5 year old’. I don’t know if this saying has its roots in fact or a supposition, but I certainly see more supporting evidence for it, by the day.
Wherever people congregate, even ‘intelligent’ people, the stupidity of the flock multiplies with every member welcomed. This little herd of atheists who clamour on one another in their little Facebook hole called ‘Crossing the Rubicon’ are, today, the target of my digital quill | poisoned pen.
I don’t join groups, because the act of doing so inevitably forces me into one of two possible roles I can have in a congregation: either I become a leader or a follower (both of which I detest with equal measure). I also don’t care much to have the average fool in the flock erode my intellectual contribution to it, nor do I need to ride the brainwave generated by another even more illustrious intellect than my own.
I may have lost my faith and my soul… but thank Newton, I’ve not lost my sense of integrity, which is something atheists care less and less about by the day, it seems. I thus avoid little groups and gatherings behind closed doors. Nothing good comes of such activities and the sense of unity serves only to remove conflict from the equation… meaning nobody gets any smarter when nobody challenges each other.
Of course, these happy conclaves with their intellectual pursuits will not endure for long. Continued harmony and peace are not a traits associated with Homo Sapiens. Antagonism may be part of our nature until the day we forcibly evict from our DNA the genes that make us disharmonious when we come together. For no sooner had two toddlers collaborated on a stacked toy-brick formation, than did the erect structure come crashing to the floor amidst the conflict between the now feuding former collaborators. Eventually, the struggle for power and dominance creates a divide where once there was none, and the age-old characters heretic and saint again take the stage for another episode of ‘tribal conflict’.
Perhaps it is my lingering anti-social, nihilistic disconcern for authority and conformity (the enemies of originality and individuality those are) that spurs me on and animates my fingers above my keyboard tonight, but I don’t particularly care; it won’t stop me from voicing my opinion regarding the behaviour of other people of ‘reason.’
If you think arguing with a christian troll (or their many aliases) makes you look intelligent, then rest assured you facing off against opponents well within your brain-weight division. But perhaps this is the sort of opponent most atheists need to look ‘intelligent’ or ‘rational.’ Beating any particular believer in a debate about reality is something a primary school child with a fleeting interest in science can do. For me, arguing directly with any christian feels like intellectual rape—me being the rapist, of course.
Then again, I speak of the senselessness of conflict whilst I, too, brandish a sword that is dripping with lamb’s blood. ‘The Word’ is not quite the armour nor offers the protection from assault that believers claim.
I have not entered an argument here about religion VS science for some time, and until I see opponents worthy of me unsheathing my blade, I won’t do so again either. I’d rather pick a fight with my fellow atheists and start thinning the pool of the pseudo-intellectual wannabe scientists who have so many links at their disposal, but seemingly no time to read the actual information they point to.
Bravo my fellow atheists! Now go to the comments box and refer me to Wikipedia for some ‘knowledge.’