Are we still having this ridiculous contest over which worldview is more monstrous?

Why not look at what all these oppresive, murdering regimes had in common?

And that's the True Believer mentality: the unshakeable certainty that they & they alone possessed The One True Way, and that anyone who believed differently was not only wrong, but a threat to the natural order of things.

Atheism didn't have much to do with mass murder & oppression. An iron belief in a particular ideology was responsible for that. Which, psychologically speaking, puts Stalin & Pol Pot & all their ilk in the same camp as any fanatical fundamentalist. All that differs between them is the specific belief system; everything else is similar, from the rigid mentality demanding blind obedience, to the fear & rage & hatred directed at anyone who won't comply. Why do you think Christian fundamentalists & the Taliban sound so much alike? Or why they both sound so much like loyal Party apparatchiks, for that matter?

Personally, I fear & distrust anyone who claims to possess The Ultimate & Only Truth. Sooner or later, they'll want to impose it on me, whether I want it or not.

And I've never met any atheists who wanted to impose their belief on me, by the way.

It's that literalists seem unable to grasp the concept of metaphor, or that something can be psychologically true without being physically true.

Gods, demons, virgin births, descents into the underworld, resurrections, etc., all exist -- within the human psyche. As symbols, they're rich & multi-layered & ambiguous, as is human experience itself. And they say much that is always true about the human condition.

It's when all that gets projected outward, onto the physical universe, that the trouble begins. What was once a personal, inner experience becomes a rigid, unyielding framework, a prison for the psyche, rather than a symbolic universe unto itself.

And you wind up with people like Haught -- clearly intelligent & passionate, but twisting his mind into horribly tangled knots to make the metaphoric somehow physically true.

Worse, too many with the same problem then try to impose it on the rest of us, trying to cram science & religion together, no matter how they have to distort both.

An eloquent post, Tom. I fully agree. I forget who said it, but one physicist once commented, "Existence itself is the ultimate free lunch." The mere fact that there's something instead of nothing, and that we exist to experience it, is wonder & awe enough for all eternity, as far as I'm concerned. And certainly enough for our brief lifetimes.

You beat me to it, so I'll simply second your post.

Same here -- I love my wife, and I wouldn't dream of hurting her. I don't see why fidelity (or honesty, or any other virtue) is somehow nobler because you do it out of fear of punishment or promise of reward. Why can't we simply be decent human beings for its own sake? Seems to me that human beings who are psychologically mature & reasonably grounded, rather than driven by insecurities & fears, would find the Golden Rule an excellent model for living. As kids, weren't we told that honesty is its own reward? Why shouldn't that be just as true when we're adults?

Look, I'm not promoting myself as some shining paragon of virtue. But I'd like to think I'm a fairly decent person, simply because it's a more satisfying way to live. We've all seen people eaten up by fear, or greed, or the hunger for power -- who wants to be that miserable? Why not strive for as much wholeness as we can manage?

You know, I sometimes get the feeling a lot of believers fear that without their belief, they themselves would run wild. So they think the rest of us are the same way. Not unlike many religious attitudes toward sex: they're so busy repressing it, striving to control it, that it's all they can think about as they struggle constantly with their normal desires. So they think the rest of us are just as consumed by it as they are, and living the hedonistic lives of excess they fear & secretly yearn for themselves.

I appreciate your opening up this way. Even when I've disagreed with some of your answers, they've always made me think, and look at the problem from a new perspective.

LW (and Cary), ignore the vehemently negative repsones posted here today. I've never understood the attitude that once you've reach a certain level of comfort & security, you're no longer allowed to suffer emotionally, psychologically, existentially. Might as well say you're no longer allowed to be human.

LW, this does sound like midlife ... but just because it's identifiable & all too common, doesn't make it any less pressing. Previous posters are right -- if you've got any creative yearnings, pursue them. Explore them. You're exploring yourself, the deeper parts of your psyche that are in need of recognition & nourishment. Read. Immerse yourself in music & art. Watch some thoughtful films.

And do some creative work of your own. It doesn't have to be "good" -- that's hardly the point. But express what's urgently struggling to be expressed, somewhere deep within you.

A book I've found useful is Jugnian writer James Hollis' "The Middle Passage." It may not work for you, but you might check it out. If it's not for you, explore other options. Remember, there's no One Magical Formula That Fits All. And there's no guarantee of happiness ... after all, what's that old Zen line? "Now that you are perfectly enlightened, you may expect to be just as miserable as before."

But maybe happiness isn't as important as deeper meaning, anyway. Maybe this particular journey does matter more than the destination.

And don't think of it as being selfish, either. We're not suggesting you devote every iota of energy to self-exploration at the expense of the rest of your life & everyone in it. But those in your life will definitely benefit if you deepen & expand the meaning of your own life.

Best of luck to you!