Book Review: THE NECESSITY OF ATHEISM

 Book Review: THE NECESSITY OF ATHEISM By DR. D. M. BROOKS. The book begins with an interesting quote from "Thus Spake Zarathrustra" of Friedrich Nietzsche. "..old Gods came to an end long ago. And verily it was a good and joyful end of Gods! They did not die ..but laughed themselves to death!" The last one to die perhaps announced, "There is but one God! Thou shalt have no other Gods before me." 

The first chapter is about THE EVOLUTION OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, which says, "when man began to persuade the idols or spirits to do things for his benefit that religion began". As man progressed, his self-made religious conceptions too advanced, reaching finally, "the modern religionist who believes that the worship of a deity in our own age is far removed from the worship of an idol by our savage ancestors, and retraces his steps and calls itself a civilized mind. With whom, we all identify ourselves, worshiping his deity."

A good discussion on "THE KORAN, THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS, THE PROPHETS MOHAMMED, JESUS, AND MOSES and other fundamentals of later religions, then follow. It is quite critical in both nature and content; the examination is through the eyes of a Martian. Further chapters examine other effects of religion, like the conception of physical disease as the result of the wrath of God, or the malice of Satan, or by a combination of both.

Another chapter examines the relation of astronomy and religion. In the very early days, the book observes, "..heavenly bodies were looked upon by the theologians as either living beings possessing souls, or as the habitation of the angels. However, as time passed, the geocentric doctrine, the doctrine that the earth is the center of the universe and that the sun and planets revolve about it, was the theory that held the highest respect." And many centuries had to pass, before astronomy could flower as a worthy discipline. 

Witchcraft, slavery, and exploitation of labour are some of the entities that flourished with the help from religion, further discussions show.

The author I think is absolutely right, when he says, "..theology is based on science", and "we have a Theology of Gaps". That is, "wherever there are gaps in scientific knowledge", theologians insert a fitting idea, and calls it God. We are in fact living with agonies that are caused, whenever such ideas become a misfit. Rather, we can try atheism to act as a filling agent. 

Are we terrestrial?

 Well, human society always is, unlike that of all the other forms of life, a bunch of contradictions. We consider or take pride in all those as unique features of our race, venerating or celebrating it at every chance. But, by doing so, we are losing a valuable opportunity - one to learn more about ourselves. In fact, rather than examining critically and analysing it, as we do for all other matters in relation to the living and the non-living, we are dumping a clear paradox like this, for no worthy reason. And we do not realize it, being blinded by the pomp and the glory we accord to human race.

Why are there such contradictions within the same race? Is each human made up of a different life altogether, unlike the rest of life? The reason for such a disparity between human and all the other species of life could be attributed to the origins of each, I think. Perhaps, rather than a cultured monkey, our forefather is a descendant of something extraterrestrial.

One such possibility is, we could be having our origins in a comet like object.

Say, a life like constituent of such an object got dropped here during one of its visits, and it successfully endured the earth. Further adaptation occurred over many centuries, during which, it acquired the shape, size and other traits necessary to survive and flourish in this planet, progressively losing some or all of the original characteristics or features. Also, the possibility of intermingling between at least one of the many forms of life here, and the visitors, cannot be ruled out. Either, by the time the comet made another visit, they or descendants were not able to recognize each other, or, another visit is yet to take place. In fact all the observations and deductions of human evolution fits here perfectly well. Which can also explain easily, the existence of intermediate forms for the human, like Neanderthal, and the absence of any such, for all the other forms of life.

This could be fitting quite well with findings and discoveries of anthropology. Think of human nature, to start with. They begin their life as terribly weak ones, unable even to stand erect for some time, unless supported. Thereafter, one grows up to become capable of doing all that, but in a rather error-prone manner, unlike all the other occupants of this planet. They need to spend much of their life, just to learn, how to live. And then there is a need to practice, what one learns. Now, can’t we imagine of a different planet, whose ‘g’ shall not prevent the new-born ones from standing erect? Followed by a not so long period of growth, which shall not be calling for every sort of attention? One that has a different ambience, where our nature will be error free, like that all the other species of life?

Or, think of our actions. On the whole, the most admired ones are those that lead to destruction, of the current social order, or the way we progress our life. Think of a few great names chosen at random and one can easily confirm it as a fact. Like, Hannibal, Napoleon, Karl Marx, Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus Christ, Buddha, or Muhammed Nabi.

Think of resources. Those available in this planet are constantly depleting, posing a threat to the seamless continuation of human species. Either our pattern of utilization, that is our life itself, is wrong, or we belong to a different part of this universe where human specific needs are never in short supply.

Think of human child. Unlike the new ones of all other species of life, why should there be a need to learn everything afresh, like learning to walk? Or, why should it be told what not to eat?

Think of human lifestyle. One that is totally unsuitable for rest of the life, and the planet, little reflection can show. And also, constantly adding difficulties to the race itself?

Think of human intellect. One that is always coming up with fresh ideas. Mostly with the potential to cause some harm to humans themselves, if not to destroy the race completely. But, on a few occasions, such ideas could result in something good too. And, by extolling beyond all proportions, the latter, the former, though abundant, gets overlooked easily.

What do all these indicate? Humans do not belong to this planet? I feel so. The forefathers of humans would have been the constituents of a different planet, or a comet as mentioned before. And some of them happened to reach earth, which might even have been uninhabited.

Say, some of them would have survived the new environment. They would have been spending their days in total discomfort, trying meet the necessities of life with whatever limited was their adaptability to the planet. The initial generations faced severe issues related to food, shelter, coverings and all, setting in motion, evolution. And successive generations adapted well, putting a brake to it.

So, our roots could be elsewhere. Where, the prevailing environmental parameters would have been a suiting one, whether for humans, or for the real stock of that species, to live in total comfort, all through one’s lifetime. And as a result, all their intellectual transactions get absorbed in a seamless manner. We are yet to locate their descendants, or they haven’t been able to meet their ones of this planet, or each of them is unable to recognize the other one.