Hello, my name is Nick Wright. I am not exactly sure of my religious beliefs. They are always changing. I was not a churchgoer at youth and was never interesting in sitting down for extended periods of times. However, my buddies introduced me to a Christian "youth group". It was some of the best times of my life. We would eat pizza, play games as a group, and talk together about stories of the bible and of moral values.
One day at youth group, the leader told me how to alleviate my sins. He said all that I had to do was accept Jesus as my savior. I did. I was happy.
Then I started to hear about the corrupt things certain religious people were doing. Two examples on the top of my list were the Catholic priest molestation ordeal and the rising prejudice I saw between religious groups after 9/11. This scared me. I lost faith in organized religion. I was atheist.
After this I started to think atheism was too cynical and a grim way to live life. My friend gave me a wonderful book called the Tao of Pooh, and I read it. I loved it and became a Taoist, which is basically like a more chill version of a Buddhist. I got bored of that too eventually. I didn't really no what I thought. So, I became Agnostic.
Over time, though, I got sick of not knowing, or knowing, or wondering, or worrying about my religious beliefs. I consider this apathy to be realism, so that must make me a Realist. That is what I consider myself now. I don't care about where I came from or where I'm going. I'm happy to have this chance to live. But of course, I am taking the Sacred and the Secular, so I must reevaluate yet again...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is said, of the nature of truth, that no one can grasp it wholly or miss it fully. Truth, in this case, being the objective state and relationship of all things, with all things - "What is", so to say. Socrates warns of that piteous creature - the Misalogue - who, having exhausted himself in the pursuit of fallacies and errors, forlornly yields to the denial of truth's attainability.
ReplyDeleteThus it falls to all intellects the duty, indeed, the compulsion, to ever seek to know more of the truth, indomitable as it may seem. It is, of course, human weakness (as presented by Dewey) to subscribe to maintaining the inertia of our ways (of both mind and body) rather than choose the virtuous deviation. So it is that we have something of a Manichean duality about us, the mind and body negotiating their ambit through a uneasy truce. It is upon this border that we endure.
From this rises the question; to whom do we look for "right opinion", and how does one discern sable verity from jetty balderdash? As usual, it is a question of parts and portions, rather than antipodes; not only shades of gray, but hues and tones of all iridescence.
I commend your reanalysis, and hope you might persevere to witness your Realism's maturity into something even greater - something closer to the truth.