Question from Archer:
Hi I am an agnostic and do support evolution. I know this is just a supposition but since biological beings continue evolving (through vast increments of time) would it make sense to think that far more advanced intelligent beings do exist and that we could actually be related to them?
Thank you.
Answer by SmartLX:
Considering only Earth, it’s unlikely that there’s ever been a species more intelligent than us here, because if so we’d probably have found some trace of them. We’ve had such a profound effect on the ecosystem that the only things that have had more impact are cataclysms like the meteorite that killed the dinosaurs; a species with even more power to affect its surroundings would have been unmistakable in its influence.
Considering the universe as a whole, though, it was already about 10 billion years old when the Earth was formed, and it took another 4.5 billion to produce human beings. Imagine how advanced we could be in one million years, if we survive that long; now, consider that if a species on another planet reached our present level of intelligence and civilisation just one million years ahead of us, out of billions of years so far, they could be at that advanced stage right now. It’s a big universe, so big that it’s probably more likely that the reason we haven’t been contacted by advanced aliens is that they don’t know we’re here and can’t reach us, not that there are no aliens.
I don’t think we’d be related to any advanced aliens that do exist, and here’s why. The study of DNA tells us that all life on Earth has a common ancestor, an extremely simple organism of some kind that lived about 3 to 3.5 billion years ago, so any related aliens had to be the progenitor of that organism. To do that, they had to be capable of interstellar space travel that long ago. An alien race one million years ahead of us is one thing, but 3 billion years is WAY early. The universe’s first stars had to explode to provide the rest of the universe with any chemical elements beyond hydrogen and helium, so it was several billion years before the building blocks of life even existed and were widespread. Earth is probably the product of at least two full star lifecycles since it formed after 10 billion years. That could be why it’s so rich in minerals, metals and exotic compounds. If that’s what it takes to produce life, it might not have been able to start a whole star-generation earlier than it did. It’s not impossible, because some stars burn fast and blow up after only a few million years, but I just think the “factories” had output so much less raw material so long ago.
Category: Text
Intelligence. How?
Question from Chan:
How does chance and random variation create human intelligence with all its “design capabilities”?
If evolution is driven by chance and necessity does it mean that human intelligence is merely an illusion?
Answer by SmartLX:
If evolution were purely a matter of random variations, it wouldn’t produce anything useful. Fortunately for us there’s a second major element, and it’s the one Darwin figured out: natural selection. Out of all the mutations in a given species (and, for instance, each new human has about 120) the ones which are actually useful become the most persistent in future generations, simply because they help their hosts to survive and procreate a little better than their peers.
It’s like dispatching a thousand people to search a ruin for treasure; most of them might find nothing, but when one guy turns up a gold coin more of the people will search in that area. It’s a highly inefficient process, but it can afford to be because evolution has had billions of years and trillions of individual life forms in which to work.
As for human intelligence, it’s a natural extension of the intelligence we see in dogs or apes. Dogs can learn jobs and tricks, and some apes can even make tools so “design capabilities” are not unique to humans. Smarter creatures generally work out ways to survive and outdo their competitors, so for any creature with a brain there’s some upward “selection pressure” on intelligence. After hundreds of millions of years of competing animals, it’s not so surprising that an animal as intelligent as homo sapiens has emerged.
There are some philosophical ideas that everything is an illusion, but intelligence is no more illusive than any other abstract concept of a physical quality, because it has effects in the real world. It can be tested, for example with IQ tests (which test very limited areas of intelligence, but still). There are things only animals of a certain level of intelligence can do, like recognise themselves in a mirror. We have a set of criteria which will allow us to acknowledge when computers achieve artificial intelligence, though these have not yet been met. Anyway, the process that produced intelligence in natural creatures is irrelevant to whether it’s a real thing now. There’s enough evidence that it is.
So I Have This Friend…
Question from Chris:
I have a friend who I just found out does not approve of equality for homosexuals, doesn’t believe in the majority of science (mainly evolution and plate tectonics), and also makes really ignorant and pretentious comments about stuff he clearly knows nothing about. I see him everyday, at least twice, and have a raging deisre inside me to say something back to him, what do I do?
Answer by SmartLX:
The obvious answer would be to actually say something back to him. You didn’t say why you haven’t done it already; care to comment and elaborate?
Generally speaking, if you want to challenge someone’s position on something, attack the position and not the person. You say this person is largely ignorant of the things he discusses; well, the simplest antidote to that is education. See how he reacts to a bit of evidence, there’s plenty around. Let us know if you want a bit of guidance in your own research.
I can be much more specific if you are, so go ahead and say what’s going on and what you need. From what you’ve said so far, I doubt your friend would read this site and find your writings. That said, you could even encourage him to write in with his own questions and/or challenges. If you warn us first, we can erase your stuff so he won’t see it. Just let us know how we can help.
Afraid and lonely? It happens.
Question from Josh:
I am a somewhat new atheist. I recently finished leaving the fold and feel that I am now very much deconverted in this long drawn out process. However, no matter how many books I read about how hell was invented later I still have a small fear of it in the back of my mind. I was wondering if you had a similiar experience or had advice. Also I am feeling very lonely since deconverting it seems as if it gets harder and harder to find secular friends as an atheist. I feel I have to keep this hidden about myself.
Answer by SmartLX:
Welcome to faithdrawal, Josh. I didn’t invent it, but I did come up with the name. The fears and anxieties instilled in you by your indoctrination (including the fear of Hell) will outlast the core beliefs on which they’re based, possibly by a long time. Such is the nature of psychology and emotion. Be assured, however, that as long as you don’t relapse into the beliefs themselves, you will feel better and less afraid as time goes on. (The opposite happened to me; after not seriously thinking about religion for over a decade, all the associated emotions had faded and no longer supported the beliefs. I mostly base my concept of faithdrawal on what people have told me in their questions.)
You haven’t said where you’re from or where you’re living, but it can certainly be problematic or even downright dangerous to identify yourself as an atheist in some places. That said, there are few places in the world where you’re likely to be entirely alone in your atheism. Think about it: if you feel you have to keep it hidden, other atheists around you probably feel they have to hide it too, including from you. A community sometimes needs a few brave folks to “come out” before the rest will be open about it. I’m not necessarily encouraging you to do this, I’m just acknowledging that it would take courage, and for good reason.
While you’re waiting for the local atheist contingent to hit that “critical mass”, you can look for local groups with “Atheist”, “Humanist”, “Secular” and/or “Freethinker” in the title. If you’re in America, for example, American Atheists and the Secular Student Alliance are all over the place these days. If you’re in Great Britain, look for the British Humanist Association. If you comment and say where you are, even to within a state or equivalent, we might be able to help with this.
Cheer up, it seriously only seems like you’re alone.
Answer Me These Questions Three
Question from Stephen:
Dear who ever is reading this,
I am a Christian, now before you get all mad and make judgements please hear me out I just want to ask you a few questions so I get what you believe. Okay so…
1. If you don’t believe in “God” do you believe in a “higher power?” And if you do who is that “higher power?” Would you consider yourself to be “God” over your own life?
2. If you don’t believe in heaven then where do you go when you die?
3. How do you believe the world came to be? Though the Big Bang theory? Or did the earth always exist?
Please respond back with your answers I just want to know more about atheists.
Answer by SmartLX:
No problem Stephen. If I got mad when someone simply identified as Christian, I wouldn’t be able to think straight when answering their questions. I’ve numbered your questions for easy reference.
1. Plenty of entities are more powerful than me. The sun makes me look completely insignificant, when considered in all its enormity. The nation of the Commonwealth of Australia has power over me, since I’m a small part of it. Gravity, while not necessarily an entity, has achieved more than I ever will. The thing is that none of these entities are concerned with the intimate details of how I live my life, so they’re not the kind of “higher power” I can appeal to for practical help in all things. (My country does concern itself with some broad aspects of my life, of course, but fortunately not all.)
Therefore I don’t think there is the kind of “higher power” you’re thinking of. In the absence of this, I certainly don’t feel like the God of my own life because I don’t have anything like that kind of absolute control over it. I do have some control, obviously, but that just makes me a functioning person with my own will, not a god. It suffices.
2. I described my position on death in an earlier piece. Read it here, and comment (here or there) if you have any questions.
3. All the evidence points to a Big Bang, or a similar expansion of all existing matter and energy from a single point in space about 15 billion years ago. The Earth formed about 10 billion years later, coming together from materials orbiting the Sun (which had formed a few hundred million years earlier). You don’t have to be an atheist to think this, and in fact many Christians believe that God caused exactly this to happen. Where atheists differ is that they don’t believe a god was required for it to happen.
You Down With O.T.G?
Question from Joseph:
Hey, I’m an undergrad at a Christian college and my major is Biblical studies. I was raised an evangelical Christian but have been an agnostic for about a year now.
I have a lot of respect for the Bible and think it is under-studied and under-appreciated by atheists.
Anyways, here is one question I’ve thought about. If the OT prophets were misinformed and delivered messages from a figment of their imagination, then why were their messages so self-critical of their people and generally doom-and-gloom messages? You would think if someone wanted to imagine a God, they would make him a lot more compassionate and less vengeful and jealous. Also, where the heck did they actually get their oracles from? Most people don’t discourse with their imaginations to the point of writing out lengthy books about them. The prophets also performed object lessons to demonstrate God’s messages. For example, Ezekiel laid on his side for over a year!
The prophets also predicted a lot of events (usually vague, but still…) that came true. I wonder if this is the same type of trick that fortune tellers use, where they give a vague answer that will inevitably be manifested at some point in time, while those with a confirmation bias will end up being convinced of divine foreknowledge. But some of the prophecies were quite specific…where did the prophets come up with these?
Answer by SmartLX:
To address a couple of things very quickly:
– The Bible is classical literature, certainly. Like all classical literature it’s underappreciated as such in today’s world, and not just by atheists. That said, given that atheists reject the central claims of the Bible, they’re not usually motivated to delve into the nitty-gritty. See my piece on theology.
– Someone advocating the fulfilment of a prophecy wants you to consider only two possibilities: that it was pure coincidence and an impossibly lucky guess, or it was genuine divinely bestowed foreknowledge. There are many other possibilities, some of which I’ve named and numbered in my earlier piece on prophecies.
Now as for the character of God in the Old Testament, let’s continue to assume that the stories were made up, as you posit, for the sake of argument. God does not have a likeable personality because the purpose of the stories is clearly not to make people feel good. (There’d be a lot less genocide in it if that were the case, for one thing.) The purpose of the stories is to inspire awe and fear of God, to influence people’s behaviour as per the Commandments (not just the Ten, either) and to drive people to spread the Word. Like in any narrative, the characters need to be what they are for the author to deliver his or her message, not just for their own sake.
You do get the impression that people did some extraordinary things to receive their messages from God and to get the books written, but that doesn’t really speak for their veracity. Some of their actions, like Ezekiel’s marathon reclining session, could be exaggerated accounts themselves – or even if they’re genuine they could have degraded these people’s mental states to the point where they heard from the God of their day without any real divine communication at all.
We’ll never really know what happened to people like Ezekiel, but an extraordinary story hardly warrants jumping straight to a specific supernatural explanation.
Quantum Golden Ratios. Whoa.
Question from Bill:
Why is the golden ratio found in the human body, DNA, the human genome, and in subatomic particles?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107143909.htm
A pattern couldn’t just be found anywhere in the quantum world. So how do atheists respond to this?
Answer by SmartLX:
As I explained earlier, it is very simple to produce a Fibonacci sequence and therefore a golden ratio of 1.618 through basic, repeated, natural occurrences such as cell division, which is why it’s so common in biology. The fact that the same appears to occur in quantum mechanics in a specific case suggests that the underlying physical mechanisms that produce these effects may make use of similar recursions.
The key thing about the golden ratio is that it’s an emergent phenomenon. Like evolution, it emerges as a result when the starting conditions of a system happen to be conducive to it. Only after it’s happened do we notice the pattern; whatever the system is, it just looks like it’s going about its business until the effect appears. There’s no guidance and no direction necessary, it just happens – and it was already known to be so common that its emergence in the mysterious quantum world, though fascinating, is not that surprising. It says no more about the existence of a god than any other instance of a golden ratio, so atheists will respond with the same sort of interest as everyone else.
Why For You Gotta Do That?
Question from Jake:
I would like to get out of the way I’m a Christian. I would like to know if there’s a code or something saying atheists need to ridicule religious people? I’m just fine that you’re an atheist because I believe God gave us free will so we should let everybody do what they want. I try not to be ignorant like a lot of Christians (I know you probably think I’m already because I beleive there’s a god but I try to know all the facts and things like that). I don’t condemn evolution as something the devil made up and in my opinion it might’ve been the way god made all the animals.
Answer by SmartLX:
There is no atheist code, period. Not believing in gods does not automatically mean you have to try and stop others from believing, or make fun of the religious, or do anything else for that matter. People who ridicule believers do so for their own reasons.
That said, many atheists do believe the religious would be better off if they no longer believed (and the non-religious would be better off if they were more numerous). It’s that idea that drives them to challenge religious beliefs. Ridiculing religious people directly is usually misguided and ultimately ineffective, but the beliefs themselves are fair game like any other idea. If they are well supported, believers should be able to defend them from attacks. If not, perhaps the beliefs are not worth holding.
You’re a Christian, so I realise that you think everyone needs to “get right with God” so they can go to Heaven. This may drive you to proselytise when you can, or discuss your faith with outsiders, or at least pray for souls to be saved and minds to be changed. You ultimately think atheists would be better off as Christians, regardless of how pro-active you are in that area. You likely also realise that some Christians go about converting people in dubious ways, such as violating constitutional separation of church and state or physically attacking those of other religions. I don’t assume that you condone these actions unless you say you do.
Likewise, some atheists can be dicks about it. Not everything done or said by every atheist is condoned by all atheists. If you want to know my opinion on a particular action or statement, whether actual or hypothetical, comment and ask or just look through what I’ve already written.
It’s Not Easy Being Atheist
Question from Sam:
I consider my being a atheist and believing nature is our creator there is no spiritual force creation to this galaxy. I feel that when I converted to atheism during late 2010 everyone doesn’t respect me at all because my religon is not the same as everyone else’s. I have so many connections with atheists who understand me well. But why I gotta be hated and I could care less if I am but why are they targeting my belief?
Answer by SmartLX:
There are a few major reasons why certain believers dislike atheists as a group, and deride atheism as a position.
Firstly and most obviously, it is indeed not the same as their religion, so the very existence of atheists implies that there are those who think their beliefs are misguided. Simply being an atheist can be seen as attacking religion, even if you never say another word against it. (Presuppositionalists and some others get around this by presupposing that self-proclaimed atheists are secretly believers, and there’s no such thing as a true atheist.)
Secondly, many believers are very confident (from being constantly reassured) that scripture and religious apologists have made a very strong case for the existence of a god. Atheists, they reason, are either willingly ignorant of theology or don’t understand the arguments, which speaks poorly for the intelligence of all atheists.
Thirdly, people who believe in the major gods also believe that those gods are the source of many other things: love, logic, conscience, purpose in life and so on. Based on this premise, atheists lack these things, and if they really thought about it all atheists should be miserable, nihilistic and amoral. Some even think that although we don’t believe in God, we do think there’s a Devil, and we worship him.
Now, as an atheist, you know all of this is wrong. You know that you really don’t believe in a god, that the arguments in favour of one are not so overwhelming, that love and purpose can come from other places and that if there’s no God then there’s no Satan either. If everyone saw you the way you see yourself, you wouldn’t get the same disrespect from believers, but the fact is that some of them see you very differently. A major reason why I run this site is to correct just these types of misconceptions about atheists, if only so we get the respect we deserve merely as functioning human beings. If you can help someone better understand what an atheist really is and isn’t, even in a small way, it will advance the cause.
Why Mohammed?
Question from Ali:
I was asking a friend if God wanted to reveal Islam to all humans why was it in Arabic? He answered me because he chose Mohammed as his prophet. Then I asked why of all the people he chose an illiterate man? They answered me because that is the miracle and how he showed his divine powers of making an illiterate man able to read and write instantly. So i got stuck on that thought and couldn’t answer because it made some sense… if you have a supporting argument for me to continue that conversation please advise me…
Thanks.
Answer by SmartLX:
It would have made more sense for God to reveal himself in multiple places, in all major languages, with a consistent message for mankind. Therefore I don’t think much of the supposed decision to send a message to just one person in any single language, let alone Arabic. That said, if that was how it had to happen, Arabic was as good a language as any – less for its popularity than for the fact that it was spoken by many groups with aggressive warriors who were ideal for spreading Islam by the sword.
Not all Muslims believe that God bestowed literacy upon Mohammed (peace be upon him, as they say). This Muslim site doesn’t say anything about him ever learning to read or write. There’s a third opinion too: a separate site (written by a non-Muslim) gives a quote from the “writings” of Mohammed himself which implies that he was always able to read.
It hardly matters, because as the first link says it’s perfectly reasonable to think that Mohammed dictated his works to his companions, at least a few of whom were surely literate. Oral storytelling and other communication has a strong tradition in the Middle East, and even today Muslims are encouraged to memorise chunks of the Quran for recital (and, of course, simply for the sake of indoctrination). It’s the simplest explanation for a large body of written work coming from an illiterate man, and it even satisfies some Muslims. There’s still the supernatural claim that the angel Gabriel (Jibril) provided much of the material to Mohammed beforehand, but his literacy is irrelevant to that issue.
Take all of the above into account, and the idea of Mohammed’s sudden literacy makes very poor Muslim apologetic when there are so many other – and so much more mundane – things that could have happened instead.