I am a fundamentally faithless individual. Thing is, I recognize that "faith" isn't a detriment. It provides solace and strength to many billions of people. It is neither good nor bad; "faith" is that thing that makes us stick together when we shouldn't. One might argue that "faith" is at the core of being human. So when I say that "I am a fundamentally faithless individual" it is not a brag. There have been many times in my life when having "faith" would have been greatly beneficial. There have been many times in my life when some sort of "faith" would have made my life much easier. But there it is - I have none. Part of the problem with the modern atheist movement is that they aren't "faithless." They're anti-faith. They're swapping one dogma for another without really considering what we draw from religion and what we should keep. Most of their arguments are sound, are justified and make a lot of sense... but those three qualities rarely apply to the human psyche. So I interact with the faithful and tell them if they want to pray for me I'll be flattered, but that I can't do the same for them because I just don't have the plumbing. I dated a girl who was militantly anti-dairy because she used to work in a pizzeria and then discovered she was lactose intolerant. She wasn't regretful; she was pissed off at everything and everyone from the cow to the milkman. It wasn't attractive. Some people are allergic to dairy products. Some are allergic to faith. How you handle that allergy says a lot about who you are.
Just re-read this. From your response it occurs to me for the first time that "faith" is potentially something that has been biologically selected for. It is something that can be beneficial. Could it be that faith is a product of evolution? It's something we've cultivated in order to protect ourselves and the pack. that thing that makes us stick together when we shouldn't
I agree wholeheartedly. These ostensibly atheist books get published every year that are an expose of how shitty religion is, and then they use that as an argument for atheism, which is fairly akin to the opposite end of the spectrum where Creationists say we don't know everything about evolution therefore a Creator made the universe. I appreciate a good book about the faults of religion, if only from a historical perspective, because faults in choice A isn't an argument for choice B in a complex world. I am a professed atheist, and if I were to write a text on the subject, it wouldn't focus on any religion in any disparaging way. Rather, it would be a philosophical text about how to reconcile morality and ethics in a world where none exist a priori (but then I would remember that Sartre and Russell already did that and were way smarter than me). Atheism shouldn't be about soapboxing. It is, like you say, the absence of faith. I was a pissed of atheist kid, but that comes from a place of frustration at what I saw as stupidity or willful ignorance by my peers. These people just need to recognize that happiness is internal, and their lives wouldn't be any better if every church went out of business tomorrow. Education and life experience are what pissed off kids need, but that only comes with time; hence, not much middle-aged angst.