"Uninformed atheism is perhaps the most blind faith of all"
Letter to the Editor
At the risk of sounding arrogant, I would like to address — and perhaps correct — Mike Dillon for the little verbal fit he had over Elizabeth Bauer's comments. While I am not a devoted reader of The Observer, and therefore cannot claim that I read the words that generated his response, I do have a few points to make with regard to his own. It is proper that I do so, because the nature of the comments I would like to address is very much a general one.
I fully respect the fact that faith is a choice. When all data has been examined, it is true that there is no conclusive evidence that God does exist. This, of course, assumes a traditional view of God. Whether there are "solid facts" is left to question, but it is conclusive evidence that both modern science and theology seem to lack. However, let me also extend your narrow intuition to a range of more consistency, as this claim of yours is also true for the opposite: there is no conclusive evidence that God does not exist.
If you did some research, you might conveniently find that there are proofs in numerous disciplines that "disprove" the existence of God. Let me inform you, however, that there also exist similar proofs of just as much credulity that do the opposite, and "prove" the existence of God. In fact, what are considered the most brilliant minds in the history of mankind often differed in opinion with regard to this matter. Among the famous "believers" was Sir Isaac Newton, devoted philosopher/scientist with an insatiable appetite for "proof" in his studies of the universe. I mention this, because it seems that there is a hint of hubris in your letter and would like to suggest a more balanced perspective. Namely, if Newton believed that the intricate order of the Universe-which he was actively involved in discovering-was suggestive of the existence of God, I'm not sure that Elizabeth Bauer's opinion can really be dismissed as sheer `nonsense.'
Of course, I will not deny that the opposite view was held by many such brilliant minds in the history of mankind. It is not my intent to make a case for the existence of God, nor is it my intention to defend or dismiss either opinion. My attempt is none other than one of objectivity. As a reader, I fear that your response was much too impassioned to hold any weight. Partly because most people who do believe in the traditional Christian God do not hold the simplistic view that God "lets all [of these] children suffer and die everyday." And "needlessly," I might add.
Also, philosophically, it does not follow that there is no God if things that may be construed as "negative" occur in the world's social contexts. If your experiences at Harvard have led you to believe that such a conclusion does necessarily follow, then I'd be inclined to think that your visit to "America's Oldest University" was not a very fruitful one. Not because you don't agree with me, but because you fail to see that there are more possibilities than those that you have enumerated.
I feel I speak for a significant number of students when I say that I'm not sure that your comments in Monday's paper escape the realm of the "silly and nonsensical." I'd also like to apologize to the reader for what may be considered a "simplistic" treatment of the subject matter, as it is, no doubt, more complex than I have had the space to digress upon.
Lastly, I openly defend and thank Elizabeth Bauer for expressing her opinion as she has the right to do. While Mike Dillon both dismissed it as "simple" and "mindless," and implied that it was "irrational," I must admit that I am deeply curious about the comments that inspired a response infused with such flagrant hypocrisy.
It is no lie that in the wide spectrum of religion, there are often individuals who do not seek to enlighten themselves with regard to the nature of the very beliefs that they choose to contend with.
A few words of advice to Mike: Uninformed atheism is perhaps the most blind faith of all.
Kelly Fabrega
Sophomore, Welsh Family Hall
January 31, 2000
All Viewpoint Stories for Tuesday, February 1, 2000
