jump to navigation

The Foundational Conceit of Atheism Is The Disproven Idea that the World Would Be Better Without God May 2, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in catachesis, cultural marxism, episcopate, error, General Catholic, horror, Interior Life, manhood, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, true leadership.
comments closed

Great point from persecuted and embattled Professor Jordan Peterson of the University of Toronto below.  I agree with most of what he says, except for the part about reading Nietzsche.  Only a rare intellect like Peterson’s can penetrate beneath the surface of Nietzsche and not get lost in horrific nihilism, which I wish he would warn his students about before sending them off to read him.  Few readers of Nietzsche come away from the experience with a strengthened faith. Indeed, there are probably fewer souls who have led more people away from God and into the dark, blind alley of atheism than Nietzsche, who lost his mind in the process of trying to reimagine a benign humanist morality cut off from Eternal Truth.

But aside from that, Peterson obliterates the fundamental conceit of atheism, which is that a world without belief in God would be a much better place. Atheists are wholly wrong in this assumption.  In fact, as Peterson rightly notes, atheists basically assume the continuation of an essentially Christian moral order (all the “good parts” they like, with none of the “bad,” such as the strictures against unchastity and perversion – the very sins which have probably driven more souls out of the Church and into heresies and irreligion than any other) with concern for one’s fellow man and a sort of benign, if sterile, humanism remaining after they rid the world of the God the Father they hate so much for telling them no.    Should atheism ever be fully realized – and we see it’s realization more and more every day, with growing cruelty, random acts of violence, hedonist gathering of riches, all manner of perversion often perpetrated on damaged, victim like souls – it would be an unending nightmare because nothing would check our baser instincts, ending inevitably in brutish anarchy with the collapse of civilization or a hideous totalitarianism.  It would be a new barbarianism, made a million times worse by technology.

This is a huge conceit and common to virtually all the evangelical atheists like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.  They propose an enlightened world of kindness and self-denying reason, basically a realization of many of the Christian virtues, but without Christ.  Sounds rather like some of our prelates in these days, too! Peterson shows that, in point of fact, self-interest, even to the point of being sadistic, can be completely rational.  Without a higher, transcendent morality to guide and limit human behavior, there are no limits to the depths to which we can, and surely will, sink.

If you ever get a chance, you might watch some of debate between Peterson and Harris.  I was very proud of Peterson – though I disagree with him on a number of vital points – refusing to give into the common ploy of modern day atheists/rationalists, that of forcing their opponents to their essentially materialist conception of the universe and putting Christianity to rationalist, supposedly scientific “tests.”  Since what is called science today was deliberately contrived by Descartes, Bacon, and the rest to exclude the supernatural, the theological, Christians are instantly hobbled by agreeing to play on this playing field. Far better is to challenge atheists to prove their grounds for a higher morality or truth WITHOUT God.  They flounder in the attempt.

Sadly there are few in high positions of leadership in the Church today who can recognize these traps and not only escape them, but turn the failed logic on their atheist opponents. I am thinking now in particular of Cardinal Pell’s (supposedly one of the good guys) exceedingly poor performance in a debate with Richard Dawkins a few  years ago.  What an appalling showing it was.

PS – Peterson is a bit of an acquired taste and I do not recommend him wholeheartedly.  While he remains nominally Christian he has favored science, and especially disordered late 19th and 20th century philosophy, far too much in trying to develop a cogent amalgam of sciencism and Christianity.   Read Edward Feser for the pitfalls awaiting this attempt (science is fine, but must be grounded in Christianity with the Faith dominant in all relevant aspects), and Fr. Dominic Bourmaud for the fundamental faults of all rationalistic philosophy.

Still, he does great work destroying many aspects of leftism and its evangelical subset, atheism.  His qualifications to make the observations he does above are impeccable, he has for nearly 30 years been a professor of clinical psychology with an active practice treating very difficult cases.  He is a great expert in the human psyche, especially from a worldly point of view but he is a relatively rare scientist today in both not excluding the supernatural/spiritual aspect of human nature, which is immense, and in not having his scientific beliefs dictated by political ideology.  Like Neil de Grasse Tyson and that idiot Bill Nye.

Advertisements