I wrote this tonight and, although the ending is more promoting the idea of atheism than anything, I think the rest is quite thought provoking. I am not exactly an atheist, but I do see the acidic influences which many religions have on the world, and this essay underscores that. If you'd like to know more about this religious journey in which I speak of in the first paragraph of my analysis, feel free to ask about it in the comments below. Anyways, just thought I'd share this and see if it could provoke some interesting conversation. However, I will remind you all to keep it conversational. Don't get too argumentative about religion in this discussion thread. That is for another place. Anyways, enjoy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important, I believe, when discussing this topic of atheism and its impact on our world, to first state that, hitherto my analysis of the subject, I have undergone a religious journey of sorts by which I have been led to the undeniable conclusion that the truth of existence which is beyond known existence is unknown or unknowable. Such an agnostic belief as this which I do presently hold is not justified or properly defined by just the term "agnostic." It's more like an agnostic atheism which appreciates science to the utmost, but, in doing so, does not deny or approve of the existence of a Deity. Atheism, then, has taken perhaps the largest influence on the world of religion since Muhammad or Jesus walked the Earth. Science, in it's current form and as I hold it to be, has become something of undeniable importance and has clutched the attention of our age in ways which have not been seen since the days of the Enlightenment. Along with this appreciation, the birth of an extreme criticism of religion has formed. In other words, modern Atheism has been born. The rejection of religious belief in order to follow human knowledge and sciences has been a greatly moving force in the present generation, and it is one which cannot be ignored. My purpose in creating this work, however, will be to properly inform the reader of this philosophy in which religion is rejected, and, also, to inform the reader of the possible effects that I foresee it having on the world of future generations and of our children. During the Enlightenment era, the belief was spread that knowledge was of the utmost importance when approaching human problems, and anything could be solved through our reasoning and rationality. This was an incredible turning point in human history mainly because it began to highlight the fact that there is no necessity to appeal to a Deity for answers. However, most Enlightenment thinkers were Christians, and they still believed in the power of human reason. It would almost seem to be paradoxical to believe in such a thing, but such was the philosophy of the Enlightenment. Precisely this is what made it one of the most important turning points in human thought as well as human history. A parallel appreciation for both God and human knowledge was formulated. This is too, perhaps, the reason that the Catholic Church was permitted to stay in power and influence throughout the Enlightenment period. Here, you can see a clear parallelism between the Enlightenment and the modern influence of Atheism; however, what makes this modern movement of ours so intriguing is that it flips the script on the Enlightenment. It supposes that humans have evolved beyond the need to appeal to God in any way, whether a problem be personal or a matter of state. The parallel powers of God and human knowledge which were so prevalent in the Enlightenment era have now parted ways, and become what seem to me to be two different camps of thought. Those who prefer faith, and those who prefer reason. I also believe, and by my own experience do I back up such belief, that many of the faithful tend to act in ignorant ways according to their faiths. Let me refer to the Islamic State(ISIS) to back up such a claim. The impact of religion on the world as we know it has evolved to a sort of unspoken war between faith and reason. This unspoken war becomes more and more visible every day, and the answer, as I believe it to be, is to simply use reason. I could go into a religious discussion on why the godly religions are discreditable, but I will tell you that faith is becoming harmful to our society. I do believe that humans have evolved beyond the point of appeal to God. This is evident in the level of our reason to be able to disprove the very existence of such a God. Open your eyes! Embrace the knowledge which has been so freely given to you! If you attain nothing else from this message, then attain the message of what the world is so clearly calling upon you, and the rest of humanity, to see clearly. That message is that religion as it has evolved to be is actually harmful to society, and it is your duty to fight faith with reason, not physically, but rationally, using the great rational mind that you have been given. This mind, I remind you, has not been given to you by any Deity, but rather it has been given unto you by the complex processes of nature. Therefore, my fellow people, deny your faiths and accept reality! For in it, I tell you, lies the greater good and future of humanity! In conclusion, this modern atheism in which we find ourselves is no less substantial than the Enlightenment. It is a raging unspoken conflict that fights the destructive mandates of faith with the truth and knowledge which any one of us may discover within our indispensable ability to provide ourselves with a reasonable existence that need not appeal to a God.
I'd suggest going back through your essay and cutting out every unnecessary word or phrase. I'm finding it to be densely cluttered with many unnecessary qualifiers.
Go back to rhetoric basics and put an easily understood thesis statement at the start of the essay. Break down each of the subjects you want to explore in support of your thesis into paragraphs. I think you'll find that introducing the discipline of paragraphs corresponding to ideas will make you write each section in a more focused and readable manner.
I'd have to agree with cgod. It's too thick to read comfortably. It feels to me that you try to prove a lot of different things all at once. As well, there's some word choices that hinder your overall readability. Take the first sentence: You've got a fair few things going on in here. "I'm about to give a qualifier that will explain my thinking." "This is something that I've thought of a while ago." "My past religious experiences have drawn me to the conclusion that 'the truth of spiritual existence' cannot be perceived." This is a lot of different things to pack into a sentence, and this really "densely-packed" structure goes on for the rest of this essay. While reading it, I find myself needing to go back and re-read because I've forgotten how it started. That problem is multiplied by the lack of line breaks/other formatting. Now moving on to the next sentence: This sentence is easier to understand (shorter length), but is still organized in a confusing way. The first part "Such an agnostic belief as this which I do presently hold" could be easily replaced with "This belief". With some other changes: There's some other stuff here, but cgod summed it up better than I've done so far. Thanks for posting it, it was an interesting read.It is important, I believe, when discussing this topic of atheism and its impact on our world, to first state that, hitherto my analysis of the subject, I have undergone a religious journey of sorts by which I have been led to the undeniable conclusion that the truth of existence which is beyond known existence is unknown or unknowable.
It is important, I believe, when discussing this topic of atheism and its impact on our world, to first state that,
hitherto my analysis of the subject,
I have undergone a religious journey of sorts by which I have been led to the undeniable conclusion that the truth of existence which is beyond known existence is unknown or unknowable.
Such an agnostic belief as this which I do presently hold is not justified or properly defined by just the term "agnostic."
This belief is not properly defined by the term "agnostic."