Greetings, all.
After a few days’ absence from SOLO, this semi-private conversation caught my eye earlier today. (Its public posting must have been a mistake, because it has now been deleted from SOLO's front page.)
Level of Moderation on SoloHQ (0) Jeff Landauer - 5/03, 5:59pm - I've been getting some complaints about some of the people p... (1) Matthew Humphreys - 5/03, 6:14pm - I say keep letting them post as long as they do so in good f... (2) Joseph Rowlands - 5/03, 6:24pm - What does it mean to post "in good faith"? We got two bible... (3) Lindsay Perigo - 5/03, 6:40pm - I strongly urge retaining the status quo. Yes, the pushers o... (4) Elizabeth - 5/03, 7:27pm - I agree, let them stay. Personally, I just stopped reading t... (5) Jeff Landauer - 5/03, 7:34pm - Liz, the problem is that it's hard to stop reading their pos... (6) Matthew Humphreys - 5/04, 1:52am - Joe asked What does it mean to post "in good faith"? ... (7) Joseph Rowlands - 5/04, 2:04am - Fair enough position. I still question how much good faith ... (8) Philip Howison - 5/04, 1:51am - I personally think that having christians, socialists etc is... (9) Matthew Humphreys - 5/04, 2:47am - Joe - having some restricted forums sounds like a better ide... (10) Jeff Landauer - 5/04, 3:20am - The original idea for this site was that it's for Objectivis... (11) sciabarra - 5/04, 3:30am - As long as you have an open, public forum, and you require u... (12) Elizabeth - 5/04, 4:37am - Hey, I think that you always look for the balance bet...
What is disgusting about this is that those of you who are upset about my participation in this forum are bothered by one thing and one thing alone: The FACT that I am a Roman Catholic.
It is certainly not any argument I have put forward, because not once have I supported a position by appealing to religious principles, let alone Catholicism. The fact of my religion has come up, of course, in response to statements or questions some of you have put to me, which I have answered. Thus, the ONLY discussion of Catholicism has been instigated by the Objectivists here, not me.
I have otherwise withheld comment on my faith, not because I don’t care to talk about it, but rather this is not (purportedly) a forum on religion. (I don't care to waste my time jamming square pegs into round holes.) What I did do is pose a grave philosophical issue I have with Objectivism: I think by metaphysically denying the existence of God, atheism became the tail wagging the dog in Objectivism to the extent of reducing its metaphysics to materialism and its morality to mere prudence. This is the path to nihilism, which Objectivists explicitly reject. To square this problem, I put forth this question about Objectivism, to which I received two types of answers.
The first was from the more sophisticated among you, who provoked a number of lively and interesting discussions about consciousness, volition, and life itself. From it, I came to understand how some of you who subscribe to Objectivist principles avoid the nihilistic abyss of materialism (although, I note that such avoidance appeared to be the result of philosophical sojourns beyond the confines of Objectivism, especially in the case of Regi Firehammer). I found that to be fruitful. Thanks.
The second was also fruitful in the sense that it educated me in the sociology of Objectivism. Some of you were nothing short of hysterical, hostile, and hateful in your reaction to my challenge of Objectivist metaphysics. You irrationally leapt to conclusions that let you set up mitred straw men to knock down with a vehemence that was as shameless as it was shameful. I founded my complaint with Objectivism on the sole basis of my experience of consciousness as self-awareness and volition as free will, and somehow the bigoted hysterics among you could not see past the fact of my Catholicism to comprehend that not a whit of my argument rested upon religious principles.
Little wonder I readily trumped your rants until that became tiresome, and so I resorted to sarcasm to amuse myself. No doubt the obvious impotence of your wrath was galling, and so some of you resorted to whining about the presence of – horrors – Christians in this forum. The irony of such behavior towards me and my Catholicism is that it is so much like the most loathsome of your enemies, those self-righteous Bible-thumping fundamentalist robots of the Jack Chick variety.
Well, there are always bound to be fools in every group. However, upon reflection, I do need to take account of the unself-conscious hatred of religion that fills this forum beyond the bigots' nonsense. Indeed, part of the boilerplate of SOLO is that the belief in God is evil. At least the bigots I encountered here are honest in following through on their Objectivist principles by transferring their hatred of my faith to me personally in the same way I wouldn’t give a Communist the time of day. I confess that I find it a little dishonest of those Objectivists who speak filthily of religion but refrain from imparting the same to a religious person, such as myself.
If such an Objectivist has truly come to the conclusion that religion is irrational and evil, then he lacks the courage of his convictions if he will not confront the religious as irrational and evil in their beliefs, and perhaps their person. Isn’t it a little cowardly to avoid the consequences of your convictions? If religion is the mind-destroying evil that many of you here believe that it is, then the bigots’ cloddish behavior towards me is the only conduct that is true to that belief. So I’ll give the fellas like Orion Reasoner their due, what little it merits. However, to those of you believe religion is evil but refuse to act upon it are not courteous: You are cowards.
As for those of you who are neither bigots nor cowards, who recognize that rational people do exist outside the precincts of Objectivism and enjoy the fullness of the world that differences make possible, I wish you well. I respect your resolution to live an Objectivist life in the world as it is, and perhaps show by example that there is a secular redoubt against the nihilism of our age. It is always refreshing to encounter people who have a true confidence of their beliefs. You are tough, not brittle, so that you do not worry about breaking when you make a mistake or must admit to not knowing. You can laugh at yourself, yet still take seriously what you believe about this world of ours. I always thought this tolerant independence of mind was the admirably ideal character of the Objectivist.
Odd how few Objectivists actually master either tolerance or independence, while so many “irrationally evil” people of faith accomplish it with ease.
Do svidaniya,
The Rat
|