G'day from Brad

[bradams]

That's Aussie for "Hi" or "Good day" spoken with a slur.

My name's Brad and I'm a 32 year old from Melbourne, Australia. I work as a factory hand and have just completed a Bachelor of Arts degree at Australian Catholic University, with majors in psychology and philosophy. I'm hoping to complete an honors year in the near future and then a Masters and PhD.

I was raised as a fundamentalist pentecostal Christian, but went to Catholic schools and became Catholic. At present I think the words 'secularist,' 'freethinker,' and 'deist' would describe me best. For all practical intents and purposes I'm an atheist, but I'm in no way militant about it. I think faith can have a positive influence in many people's lives and most of my friends are Catholic. Politically I'm liberal, but communitarian. I see communitarianism, as expounded by philosophers such as Michael Sandel, Charles Taylor and Michael Walzer, as a form of liberalism.

I joined booktalk because of the dearth of people I know who are interested in a serious and unprejudiced discussion of ideas and issues, and because I like reading! I usually read non-fiction, mainly in the areas of philosophy, psychology, politics, science, and the Enlightenment. I do read fiction from time to time.

At the moment I'm reading Susan Jacoby's "Freethinkers" and "The Virgin and the Gypsy" by D.H. Lawrence.

I look forward to getting to know you all and having some interesting discussions!

[irishrosem]

Hey Brad, good to hear from you. We had another Aussie stop by recently, but I'm not sure if he/she stuck around.

It's funny you should mention Enlightenment reading. We've touched on some Enlightenment thought recently on various threads. I see you saw one such thread with A Secular Age. I'd be very interested in discussing political theory/Enlightenment with a non-U.S.er. I hope you stick around.

BTW, I've read and enjoyed Jacoby, though not Freethinkers. You'll have to let us know what you think.

[bradams]

Thanks. I certainly plan to stick around. Of course, there are some periods of time where I'll be busier than usual and unable to contribute much, but booktalk looks like a goldmine of people, thoughts, and ideas.

[Chris OConnor]

Hi Brad

Welcome to BookTalk.org. Wow, you seem like a perfect fit with our community. Your interests are completely in line with what we're all about.

I'm curious about how old you were when you drifted from Catholicism to atheism/deism/secularism or freethought. And what fueled the change in belief?

[bradams]

Hi Chris.

I started questioning when I was about 15, but it wasn't serious or sustained.

I first started a serious examination of my faith when I was 18. This was triggered when I wished my Chemistry lab partner Happy Easter - he was Jewish. That made me wonder because he was a pretty smart guy but he didn't believe my religion was true. Not long after that the Heaven's Gate cult committed mass suicide and I thought they were totally irrational, but then I asked how I knew my faith was any more rational than theirs?

At the time I was heavily involved in a lot of volunteer work with the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, and associated mostly with fellow Catholics, some of whom seemed to have reasonable answers to how Catholicism was rational. The work of St. Thomas Aquinas was a large part of this.

Eventually, through my philosophical studies my religious beliefs came under the most sustained and serious questioning they had yet suffered, and in the end I decided that they could not answer some very serious problems - most notably the problem of evil. The reasoning of the Church on a multitude of issues such as sex, contraception, homosexuality, lying, transubstantiation did not meet the standards I expected.

I remained nominally Catholic and still attended Mass regularly - even though I no longer believed I still wanted to. I missed my faith and the fact that some philosophers I respected (mostly Charles Taylor, Alasdair MacIntyre and Bas Van Fraassen) gave me some hope that there might still be some convincing arguments for it.

The election of the ultra-conservative Joseph Ratzinger, whom I once admired until I read the account of his debate with philosopher John Hick, as Pope triggered my final split with the Church. The Church claimed to have the fullness of the truth, but when their reasoning (in particular Ratzinger's reasoning) was so flawed I could not trust their judgment.

I suppose I settled on deism because the world still looks ordered to me, lottery fallacy notwithstanding. Perhaps is because I don't understand it well enough, but although I believe it is true I think evolution suffers from some flaws as an ultimate explanation. I think it is still plausible to believe in an intelligent (but not perfect) designer or creator, but not the perfect god of love that religious believers worship. That's why I'm a deist rather than an atheist, but as I always say I'm an atheist for all practical purposes because I don't believe the god of nature reveals itself or its will to individuals personally and I don't believe it interferes in the workings of the world.

I've been looking at booktalk for a while, but I still felt uncomfortable with my new beliefs. I'm now comfortable enough with them to discuss them with others of like mind - and even with others of unlike mind!

I don't set out to convert people to atheism for a couple of reasons. First, I don't think you can do that with most people because they're unwilling to seriously examine their beliefs. Second, I know that it can be quite a painful experience to lose one's faith, although I think it is ultimately worthwhile. I worry that others may be less lucky than I have been and be rejected by some family and friends over religious differences.

That doesn't mean I think atheists should just shut up and say nothing. I don't think anyone should try to convert anyone else away from their own belief system on a personal level. If someone wants to discuss things that's a different story, but I disagree with unsolicited proselytizing.

The writing of books is a different matter again because one can choose to read them or not. I hate the way religious people complain when something is "anti-Catholic" or "anti-Christian" or "anti-Islam." Why can't someone be anti these things? The other things about books and articles is that an individual can choose to read them or not.

As far as education goes, I think it should be secular. If parents want to raise their children in their own religion in the privacy of their home that's fine with me but at school they should be taught what our best science tells us - and that means that human beings evolved through natural selection rather than being created in the image of some deity. I know it would be hard to police, but I think there are limits as to how parents should be able to teach their faith to their children. Brainwashing and emotional blackmail are out of bounds for instance.

[jales4]

Hi Bradams,

Welcome - I've enjoyed reading what you've written, and hope you stick around.

Second, I know that it can be quite a painful experience to lose one's faith.

This pretty much sums up where I'm at now. It is like there is a void, that is unfillable.

I'd like to discuss this more - perhaps I'll open a thread in the appropriate forum.

Being Australian, have you read much of Bryce Courtenay's books? I really enjoyed his earlier books - Potato Factory, etc. I haven't been interested in any of his books since Brother Fish though.

Jan.

[Chris OConnor]

Wow, we have a similar history of how we lost our faith. I was just a lot younger when things started to not add up. Watching my very religious mother die a horribly painful death from cancer at 6 years old had me scratching my head trying to figure out how a "loving" God could allow such horror to occur to one of his "children."

Of course that was just the beginning of my inability to disengage my brain. Thanks for posting your story and I hope to get to know you better on the forums and in our chat room.

[bradams]

I must seem a little slow by most atheist's standards.

By way of explanation (excuse?) I should say that in psychological terms I have a high need for cognition and a low need for closure.

In English, I love expending mental effort on a problem and I have little need for a final answer which means I'll sit in a state of agnosticism or stay in my previously held belief for a long time before coming to a conclusion - if I ever do!

[bradams]

I thought I should re-introduce myself!

Apologies for the absence. I got accepted into a postgrad psychology course and the semester started and I got caught up in the work and it all happened very quickly! It's study week this week, so I can breathe a little bit and thought I'd check out what's going on here.

[DWill]

Hi Brad,
I like how you've told your story and think that it's somewhat similar to mine, although I was never as committed to a religious faith as you were. I am an atheist in fact (as most people would understand the word: not having belief in a god who pulls the strings in our lives), but not much for attacking religion despite the large target it can sometimes present. I think that "enlightenment" as a synonym for atheism (or any way of thinking) comes too close to arrogance or even intolerance of others who chose to believe differently. I've read that Richard Dawkins proposed that atheists call themselves "brights," an idea I could never get behind.
I'll remember your high need for cognition/low need for closure formulation; it stikes a chord with me. Anyway, I hope to see you around.
DWill