Saturday, January 05, 2013


In my 21 years on this blue ball flinging me around a burning hydrogen ball, I have learned that doubt is good. Doubt is in general good for you.

Doubt what you say? Everything. From religion to your teacher, to your textbook, except calculators, calculators are always correct if u key stuff in right.

Why? Because odds are you are wrong.

For instance, religion. I personally am an agnostic, and if I was asked to describe my beliefs in the existence of a God, the best description right now would be -I'm not sure, some days providence makes me feel like there is a God, some days I don't feel it. From my epistemological point of view, it is pretty much impossible to say whether or not God exists. Why? Didn't the atheists prove with their awesome science that God does not exist? Isn't the flying spaghetti monster just as possible? Are not all the holybooks contradictable and thus all religions wrong?

The answer is maybe. Science does not disprove God in any sense of the word disprove. The most that scientist have done is prove the Catholic church wrong, among other things. Yes the Big Bang probably created the universe and some apologists might say "well God caused the big bang!" and atheists go on and say "Who created God then?!" and both sides shake their fists at the other, thinking they won the debate and the other a fool, both certain in themselves.

I prefer to say Maybe. Maybe the bible is wrong, davinci code style (as in tampered with), maybe it isn't. And even if it is, it does not disprove a creator, and lalala. Point is, there is no certainty either way. Atheists might reason that because of the existence of evil that an omnipotent and all loving god cannot exist, and perhaps they are right. But then again you would go into arguements about free will and earthquakes and famine.

What I see wrong with this picture is that both sides are so certain of their position. Atheists are so certain that God cannot exist because A, B and psychedelic mushrooms, while religious people believe in a god because of X, Y and Jesus. They take proof that is not conclusive as conclusive and close their minds.

What are we supposed to do then? Be doubtful forever? Yes

Even Jesus and Moses had doubts, so dont think that doubting God and his commands would be a sign of failure. And as any scientist will tell you, there is no prove. You can never objectively prove something, it is only possible as human beings to get evidence to increase the likelihood of something. So let me invite you to agnosticism. The maybe people. My personal mix of it is "I'm not sure, but I'd rather believe and be wrong than not believe than be right."

But enough of religion. We should doubt other things too. Most importantly what people tell you. Even this, because there is a possibility that being certain about things while going through life is good for u. But from my experience, it is better to doubt. Reasonably doubt of course. If you see a man holding a bloody knife in his bloody hand attached to his bloody arm while wearing a bloody shirt and smile, you better have a very good reason to think that he didnt stab that person on the floor.

But hyperboles aside, doubt what people say. This also means do not trust people completely. While trust is good (for life happiness according to some article you should google or ask me about so I can show u), it should not be dispensed freely. When someone tells you that the product hes selling is the best, doubt him. If your friend gossips about how your other friend is a slut, doubt her. If someone tells you that someone else is talking bad about you, doubt that motherfucker. Why? Because first of all, especially with gossip about people, the other person is not there to defend themselves. So you should do so in your mind and perhaps your words. If person A says that person B has been stealing things, evidence is needed before u label person B in your mind as a thieving scumsack.

Especially news. News today is so partisan that one event can be seen in two different ways completely.

And then there is effectiveness.

Right now there is a big hooplah about gun control because crazy people have been shooting not so crazy people (because who cares if they shoot other crazy people eh) and both sides of the US gun debate are arguing for policies. One side is arguing and pulling out statistics that less guns= less gun violence/fatalities while somehow the other side can pull out statistics that show the opposite. Both sides are adamant, yet odds are one (or possible both) is wrong. But because they like being certain so much, they will stay wrong.

No comments: