Los Cotrasanzetso

And I'm enjoying the book. I like him much more than I did Richard Dawkins, who struck myself as a bit smug. Contemptful, even. One idea in particular however stuck out at me, and that was Dan Barker's loyalty to the truth.

I'm not so sure that truthfullness automatically should recieve the highest rung on the ladder. Well, the idea of the ladder itself is a little bit sacrilegous in itself. But essentially, I see the scientific community struggling with very esoteric questions. These questions are very challenging and very difficult. We are basically starting to run up against the upper limits of our own human abilities, and the only way for ourselves to continue to advance is to start manipulating with our genetic code or start altering our biochemistry--essentially tinkering with what makes us, us.

As controversial as that might turn out to be, I won't comment on the appropriateness of doing that or not. But I would like to point out that I think the idea of progress that we are pursuing is an illusion. I am not saying that this is so, but it might happen in the near future that being an atheist might be equivocated with being an advocate of unbridled progress.

And yet, to get caught up in such progress without realizing the immediacy of where one is as one is-- is to follow an illusion. I think atheists believe that mankind has some ultimate destiny to unlock the secrets of the universe. There's some burning desire to want to know and to want to question. I'm not advocating that we stop, but I think we should recognize that there is no Manifest destiny of such a sort--just as there was no such original manifest destiny of the original west. To believe that there is, is to be a horse chasing a plastic carrot.

What I liked about Dan Barker's book, however, is his embrace of certain values, the fact that he still has a certain fondness for his Christian Past. His kindness and gentleness. He preaches not because of others, but because of hisself. I guess that's why I like him so much: Because his activism is more a part of him, than it is about converting or correcting Christians.

I'm certain not many christians have thanked him for his pursuits. Then again, reading his book, I get the feeling that he's not in it for the converts.