Quote:
Originally Posted by john76  My only point is that it is important for people to realize there is a potential danger here. I went through a difficult period because I took the possibility of an atheistic ideal and gave it a very prominent place in my life. It led to a lot of negative emotions. I am, as Nietzsche said, only drawing ink from my own well here, but I am just trying to suggest to people that if they are interested in following the same investigative path, they should do so with caution. The atheistic ideal has the ability to trap the mind just like the theistic ideal does. I hope that people can keep in mind that both atheism and theism are only ever possibilities. Take care. |
Of course there's "danger" anytime a person steps outside whatever belief set they've adopted or had thrust on them. But, in my humble estimation, no one has achieved anything approaching personal growth without facing that danger and accepting it.
In chaos theory, that juncture is referred to as a "point of perturbation". To put it simply, a point of perturbation exists when a person experiences the emotional effect of so many alternative and seemingly irreconcilable truisms that he or she reacts in one of two ways: either becoming intimidated and returning to a "comfort zone"; or making a leap and genuinely considering alternative possibilities.
I personally consider the two alternatives you refer to, theism and atheism, as comfort zones, characterized by the absolutes they espouse. They're certainly much safer than agnosticism, which essentially represents a perpetual point of perturbation. But are they really better?