One of my articles (havn’t translated it yet, but for now it doesn’t matter) I started a big discussion wich drifted off into religious dispute. There are religious and atheist people discussing. This diversity makes me happy even though the polemics that surface here are destructive. In discussions like this it’s not easy for me to take up a position because that contradicts my own believe.
Reality is individual. Everything you believe in is true in your reality.
That’s how easy it is. So what happens if two individuals of different believe claim to be the owner of the one and only truth? This leads inevitable to a paradox. That is if you believe there is only one common reality. But both are right. In their individual reality. There is no common reality. Of course their realities are linked. If I punch your nose in my reality it will bleed in yours. If I go to hell for it in your reality, it doesn’t have to happen in mine. If believers would accept that, they would have no more reason to fight with believers of another kind. I think it’s impertinent to push your own view of the world upon others.
All we can imagine exists.
It exists in our imagination. Existence is not limited to materiel things. An atheist can deny the material existence in his own universe, but he can not negate the gods in other peoples heads. All that we perceive as our world is a vague interpretation of all our impressions that converge in our heads. Our brain is not good in distinguishing between impressions from the outside and our imagination. Our autobiographic department writes history after its own liking. Don’t forget: Each one of us has his own individually coined perception, interpretation and therefore his own account of history. Who believes in a common truth believes as well that his own history is congruent and therefore doesn’t accept any other interpretations. That would question their own truth and thus threaten the fragile house of cards of their self. If you accept that you are not the owner of the truth you will be able to accept other people and points of view more easily.
Dangerous are those with a lack of abstract thinking that are not able or willing to encompass the manyfold of realities and suffer from low self-esteem. These are the ingredient of intolerance, source of fighting and war.
The intersection of all truths is what we call reality. It is a social agreement on commonly perceived entities. It is the consensus upon which the rules of social systems are based. (Dear sociologists, please excuse my lax use of the terms of your trade, I am just trying to understand the world out of my layman point of view). Such rules are essential for living together in a society but have to be adapted to social drift. What is considered to be truth today doesn’t necessarily have to be tomorrow.
One whish from Misses Asemwald: It would be nice if we wouldn’t always take our truths so seriously.
Maybe now it’s evident why I am often not able to take up a position in religious debates. I accept a lot. What I can criticize though are the actions of others. Each one must take responsibility for his own action no matter if it was motivated by any religious motive. And if any church calls for hostile action it shall not be judged differently than any other person doing it out of more mundane reasons.
As long as everyone act responsible towards his environment he may believe in the easter bunny as the reincarnation of the god of sausage. But please accept that the god of sausage can kiss my behind and that I think he is a real moron.
PS: For all those doubting my existence: I believe that I exist. Therefore I exist. At least in my own reality. As long as other people believe in me I exist in their heads.