Ignoramus et Ignorabimus

Let’s try something fun today. Let’s argue for religion with the aid of logic.

So you believe that the Earth is not flat but a spheroid, and things fall down because of something called gravity, and that plants breathe out carbon dioxide at night, and that diamond cuts through glass and leucocytes defend the human body against diseases?

Consider this, as an average person not involved in the field of technology, science and medicine- how exactly are you sure that the Earth is not flat, that leaves blowing about are a result of some supernatural activity, or that we think from our liver and the brain pumps blood?

Consider the possibility that your source of information is rigged, and what you know is simply another person’s opinion. Just another version of the truth.

You talk of religion being clouded with obscurity and ridiculousness on the fact that you cannot verify the existence of a Heaven, a Hell, and that no one can verify the concept of an afterlife and no one can guarantee the presence of an invisible man in the sky who has been playing the role of a Peeping Tom throughout eternity.

You. An average person. Not an expert in science or theology, have formed an opinion that because there a diagrams of anatomy and of the world looking like a cat-eye marble from space, it has to be valid. You have not done the research, you have not opened up a corpse and you have definitely not travelled into space- yet somehow you make love to science like your sanity depends on it.

What I am essentially saying is that if ‘you’  have not verified the presence of supernatural beings, neither have you verified the scientific theories that you read about. Essentially both sides are of the same coin, two versions of the same reality. But yet you choose to prefer one over another. And you choose to call some bloke with his bowed head and folded hands to have blind faith.

Blind faith.

At the base level, the words of a religious text hold as much validity as a thesis on evolution to you- the confident ignoramus. So humor me when I say that the truth is what you choose to believe. Surely more than half of the world’s population of agnostics and atheists has never conducted a scientific experiment on their own to arrive at a conclusion that they define their belief and philosophy by. Yet, they hold the scientific truth superior to the metaphysical one.

By this I am certainly not putting religion above science, but rather placing them on the same platform. By no right should you then, the man who hasn’t discovered or experimented or researched upon something form the conclusion that it is the only reality and murder the possibility of another one.

Diagrams exist for both the sides, so do images and manuscripts. It is what we choose to believe that becomes our truth. The opinion that we favor that defines us. It is only the motivation to prove the opposition wrong that drives us to defend our beliefs.

Fundamentally it is all moot. Your choices hold the key to your reality.

Amen. Or not.

About the Author

rohan (2)Rohan Mukherjee

Rohan is currently an undergraduate at National Law University, Odisha with a keen interest in Intellectual Property Law, Economics and Anti-Trust Laws. He is serving as the Associate Director (Programs) at Model Governance Foundation. With a flair for writing short opinionated articles and poetry, he also dabbles at parliamentary debating. Musically inclined, also a drummer and percussionist.

One thought on “Ignoramus et Ignorabimus

Leave a Reply