Dawkins

Just a short, simple explanation of my view-nothing heavy or scientific or philosophical-or a Phd dissertaion.

I was  for the past while listening to all of Dawkins` lectures; I mean ALL! -and  I have wondered and  do wonder at his adamant fixation on atheism. I have within myself come to some conclusion-we all have to come to our own realization, our own resignation as to the idea of God or no God. And I have to add all conclusions are the right ones-whatever one holds dear. 

 Now- by God, I do not mean some entity  strictly in a religious sense only- but as a cosmic entity- of some sort of super consciousness form that orchestrates  all. Though I do fall into the "religious" category. According to Dawkins -we, are either stupid, lost or insane-a slave to ignorance . Yet- he cannot prove the opposite at all-just as I cannot prove my belief. Thus- it all comes down to a matter of "faith".  So all debates are futile.

Dawkins may have graduated from Oxford-may have read Darwin`s "Origin of Species', have the vernacular of the entire Oxford dictionary, but the gift of insight he has not-or  has less than the least of us. Why? I think that he has been seriously disillusioned with God. Either he left God, or perhaps  God left him for-I doubt the latter. Perhaps his prayers were not answered  at some point in his life-thus anger, frustration, rage-  all aimed at God- and  then finally a total rejection.

True-I cannot prove that God exists, but for me God exists, a personal thing for all of us-I do not want to persuade anyone, we have free will –it is either or. It is all a matter of faith, a very personal connection to some higher power. All is subjective -none of us have the truth,yet all of us have the truth.

 He- tries to explain , to convince in any way  or form that God does not exist-“there is nothing, for all is from nothing. Nothing equals nothing.  Thus there is no God”.  He has this dire need to persuade, a deep desire, to convince others to feel the same way-this gives him a sense of peace, a sense of validation that he is right.

For me atheism is a very hard concept-though I have an open mind, it is hard to believe that  all and everything simply sprung from “nothing”-from the “big bang”. But then what was  the big bang?- who created the big bang?-or more importantly –what was before the big bang?-and before that?  Nothing?  What is nothing?-as all is something-this is not simply my question but of many  present  modern day physicists including Michio Kaku. 

 The problem here that Dawkins tries to put on this a very simple spin-whereas it is the most complex of mysteries, beyond the human intellect. Far beyond comprehension and  understanding of our brain.  His idea is a cop-out, for it is far easier to  say that-“nothing exists”. It is a very difficult idea that there just maybe something, someone out there whom is actually creating, orchestrating this human story. He is well within the constraints of the box, this is what ignorance is- he would say freedom.

The mind has the ability to fly-to see well beyond the limits of its borders. Nothing is impossible to imagine, even God-though not as a Biblical image, but as a galactic entity- as this all encompassing  cosmic consciousness-in which exist all that there is. Richard, it is time to step outside of the box.

 I am not as I was-

 Et ego non sum qualis eram

The  mantra for the new man.