The fatigue of not believing in a god
The fatigue of not believing in a god
Dostoevsky had very clear ideas: «If God doesn't exist, everything is permitted». This is the position x=y=z = zero, a computer scientist would say, that is: this is the starting point of existentialism. Effectively everything is permitted, everything is permitted if God does not exist, and consequently man is "abandoned" because he does not find a point of reference, either within or outside of himself. What makes this position difficult is that the man has no excuses. Everything he produces, does, or becomes solely responsible, vis-à-vis otherness and vis-à-vis his conscience. For the believer however, if he causes harm to someone or rapes a child, he perceives the pain it produces, but inside he has a little voice that says: "I have not committed a crime against the injured or the raped, but against God, against its rules". The almighty god will, if I repent, also forgive me. Very comfortable. On the contrary, this existentialist condition also eliminates determinism: there are no excuses, man is free, man is freedom. Those like me, who deny the existence of god, do not find values or orders to be respected must, towards men, women, animals and things, pay extra attention, have behaviors that respect others, that do not produce pain and which gives it a correct and equal value. In other words, we must continually seek our own good and that of others, we seek good deeds and, if we "fell ass" about this, we aim to produce an improvement in ourselves and in those in front of us. Everything simple it would seem, are we real heroes, are we the best? It's not like that at all, unfortunately we have big stumbles. The existentialist does not believe in the neutrality of passion. He will never think that a healthy and powerful passion is a raging river that fatally leads man to make mistakes. He has an obligation to control himself, he doesn't like to produce pain or be guilty towards others. He experiences a strong conflict in the management of emotions, he wants to control them, limit them if necessary, he does not want them to become an excuse for behaviors that his conscience would criticize or condemn in retrospect. This is why life, for those like us, becomes a tiring even if fascinating, creative, sometimes disruptive adventure, we are men condemned to invent men every day. Each time we have to reinvent ourselves and, as Ponge says in a recent article: <<Man is the future of man>>. Very accurate. Let us try to distinguish, however: for a believer, it means that that future is written in heaven, that God observes it, that God has decided or decides, and in this case it is not a matter of "future" at all, if everything has already been established , indicated. If instead we mean that every man born and raised on earth has a future to build, a future to invent for the most part, then we are our "future". Everything awaits us and we must pay attention to everything. In this case "we are left" to ourselves, but surely many of us will invent exemplary behaviors, will contribute to a more fascinating future, which will be an example for the descendants, who like good "Renaissance", they too will seek a continuous improvement of the human condition on the planet. Why are believers the vast majority? Since it is clear that human nature prefers obedience to someone, as an easy, less demanding, less onerous lifestyle choice: being commanded is a reassuring position, it doesn't force you to think or decide and I understand them, even if they don't I share. Being a non-believer and paying attention to others is really tiring and also at the risk of feeling lost, abandoned. Creativity, attention as an art, fear and doubt are excellent human values, and this heartfelt humanity consoles me. Above: Florence
Dostoevsky had very clear ideas: «If God doesn't exist, everything is permitted». This is the position x=y=z = zero, a computer scientist would say, that is: this is the starting point of existentialism. Effectively everything is permitted, everything is permitted if God does not exist, and consequently man is "abandoned" because he does not find a point of reference, either within or outside of himself. What makes this position difficult is that the man has no excuses. Everything he produces, does, or becomes solely responsible, vis-à-vis otherness and vis-à-vis his conscience. For the believer however, if he causes harm to someone or rapes a child, he perceives the pain it produces, but inside he has a little voice that says: "I have not committed a crime against the injured or the raped, but against God, against its rules". The almighty god will, if I repent, also forgive me. Very comfortable. On the contrary, this existentialist condition also eliminates determinism: there are no excuses, man is free, man is freedom. Those like me, who deny the existence of god, do not find values or orders to be respected must, towards men, women, animals and things, pay extra attention, have behaviors that respect others, that do not produce pain and which gives it a correct and equal value. In other words, we must continually seek our own good and that of others, we seek good deeds and, if we "fell ass" about this, we aim to produce an improvement in ourselves and in those in front of us. Everything simple it would seem, are we real heroes, are we the best? It's not like that at all, unfortunately we have big stumbles. The existentialist does not believe in the neutrality of passion. He will never think that a healthy and powerful passion is a raging river that fatally leads man to make mistakes. He has an obligation to control himself, he doesn't like to produce pain or be guilty towards others. He experiences a strong conflict in the management of emotions, he wants to control them, limit them if necessary, he does not want them to become an excuse for behaviors that his conscience would criticize or condemn in retrospect. This is why life, for those like us, becomes a tiring even if fascinating, creative, sometimes disruptive adventure, we are men condemned to invent men every day. Each time we have to reinvent ourselves and, as Ponge says in a recent article: <<Man is the future of man>>. Very accurate. Let us try to distinguish, however: for a believer, it means that that future is written in heaven, that God observes it, that God has decided or decides, and in this case it is not a matter of "future" at all, if everything has already been established , indicated. If instead we mean that every man born and raised on earth has a future to build, a future to invent for the most part, then we are our "future". Everything awaits us and we must pay attention to everything. In this case "we are left" to ourselves, but surely many of us will invent exemplary behaviors, will contribute to a more fascinating future, which will be an example for the descendants, who like good "Renaissance", they too will seek a continuous improvement of the human condition on the planet. Why are believers the vast majority? Since it is clear that human nature prefers obedience to someone, as an easy, less demanding, less onerous lifestyle choice: being commanded is a reassuring position, it doesn't force you to think or decide and I understand them, even if they don't I share. Being a non-believer and paying attention to others is really tiring and also at the risk of feeling lost, abandoned. Creativity, attention as an art, fear and doubt are excellent human values, and this heartfelt humanity consoles me. Above: Florence