Between Knowledge and Belief

Image result for sacred geometry in the atomIn our modern world, we have knowledge and we have beliefs. Knowledge consists of facts and information gained through experience, either by ourselves or by others that is backed by irrefutable evidence. Beliefs are the acceptance that something is true or exists without factual certainty, either because we are unable or unwilling to test those beliefs. There is a third element that lies between knowledge and belief that most of us fail to realize. The element that all knowledge was held as a belief until it was proven.

Growing up, I had a falling-out with religion and later became strictly atheist. In this I became biased against beliefs and only trusted in the facts. If something was not yet a fact, then one day it either would be proven or it would not. Such is the process of the scientific method. But when you think about it, even the scientific method has a loose basis in belief. You have to believe in a potential outcome, your hypothesis, that can be tested to either be true or untrue. If you did not believe in the hypothesis even just a little bit, you would not have ventured on to testing it.

There is a balance between knowledge and belief which some of us realize. It is growing harder however to practice this balance as there seems to be a wedge being driven between the two. This has been happening since the Renaissance to where today topics that dwell in the realm of spirituality are considered taboo by science. The duality of having either one or the other is disharmonious as not everything is able to be proven nor will everything that people believe end up being true.

A belief is nothing more than an untested or untestable hypothesis. Isaac Newton had this as he was developing the Laws of Motion and the Theory of Gravity. Albert Einstein and the Theory of Relativity and the list goes on… Granted, these are very macro-scale events for the scientific community but they originated as a personally held belief by someone at some point. The original ideas backing these concepts no doubt originated long before these great figureheads of science came along and put their names on them. The difference is that in their time, they finally possessed the necessary resources in order to properly test them.

There still remains a great and many things that we are unable to properly test. No doubt things will remain that way for long after we all pass. Each and every one of us has our own theories and beliefs that one day could possibly end up as being true. The catch here though is that there is a big difference in the beliefs that could be true and the ones that we wish could be true. Whether we lean more towards science or religion, each of us must be mindful of the plausibility of reality that we accept these ideas with an inquisitive, but open, mind.

 

The Man-Made God

The conventional definition of God is inaccurate and grossly outdated. It is an archetype from an era where humanity feared what we did not understand. At the time, the human race had no means to eliminate the unknown, so we created Gods. Over time, the plural was reduced to the  singular, omniscient and omnipotent form most commonly accepted today. To believe in this man-made creation today is to lack a sufficient set of reasoning skills, a basic understanding, and a curiosity of the universe we exist in.

God is not a magical being. Things that were once deemed or considered to be magic have been explained by science. Things that appear to be magic still will eventually be explained by science. If creationism were true, it was done with science by a being or beings that possessed an understanding of the sciences that we have yet to dream of. If we were to define God as being the underlying connection of the universe that we have yet to understand (see quantum mechanics), then that might be a more accurate description.

The fact of a God having to use the same principles of science as we do, as well as the ones we have yet to discover, would make us equals would it not? Just because someone else knows more than you does not make them more superior to you. Would you bow to them just because they seemingly know more? When you possess the same amount of potential in time?

Religion spends so much time trying to define God in human-like terms so that it can be more relatable. Its like a children’s story, but for those who refuse to grow up. These man-made limitations keep us from ever being able to accurately describe such a concept. Why would such a complex entity care about who you slept with, how much you drank, that you committed whatever crimes, and that your sincere apology is necessary in order to further validate God’s existence?

The man-made God is quickly becoming an endangered species now. As each day passes by, more people are realizing how juvenile and underdeveloped the idea is. As long as we continue to limit the term “God” by our humanistic terms, we will never gain a sufficient understanding of the universe around us. There is something more to this universe, I will admit, but it is not God by your definition…

 

Spiritually Atheist

Growing up I had no choice but to be Mormon. The reason being was because that was the norm no one ever deviated from. My lack of choice coupled with observed hypocrisy and a flair of teenage rebellion started shaping my atheistic views. Being atheist however does not mean that one is not, or cannot be a spiritual person.

Spirituality originates from religion but its basis relies on the purely subjective. Today, spirituality is best summarized as personal experiences focused on finding a deeper meaning to life. It is biased to say that spirituality is tied only to a religious construct. The way I personally define it is that  religion is for the masses while spirituality is for the self. Just because I search for a purpose and a reason to justify my own life does not make me a religious person.

Atheism is easier to define. Atheists reject the idea of god(s) that supposedly created the universe and all the rules in it. The absence of belief. What is commonly misunderstood however is that atheism allegedly rejects all things even remotely religious. Over the years I have realized that such a thing is a ridiculous notion. For to long I rejected anything bearing a semblance to religion because of this misunderstanding.

Certain aspects of life require a level of faith. The aspect of having faith does not automatically deem it religious. If I were to build a machine, based off of what I know and prior experience, I would believe that it would work even though I have not seen it work yet. Without that initial dose of faith, I would be crippled by uncertainty and never bother to build the machine in the first place. The same applies to the scientist whenever he tests a hypothesis. Unfortunately, not everything is as clearly defined or currently testable in order to turn a ‘belief’ into a ‘fact’. Beliefs are merely the untestable or untested aspects that remain to be proven/disproven.Beartooth Chipmuncks.jpg

Because of this, there are a lot of things that I believe that have yet to be proven. My beliefs remain unproven as there is no accurate way to test them but one day there will be. At a quantum level, there is an inter-connectedness of the universe around us that we are barely grasping to understand. In that, I am spiritually atheist.