Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Thursday, April 19, 2007 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

by Mapantsula, Daily Kos

Thanks to dimon for the link.

Reposted from:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/19/18451/0971

Dinesh D'Souza writes:

http://newsbloggers.aol.com/2007/04/18/where-is-atheism-when-bad-things-happen/

Notice something interesting about the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings? Atheists are nowhere to be found. Every time there is a public gathering there is talk of God and divine mercy and spiritual healing. Even secular people like the poet Nikki Giovanni use language that is heavily drenched with religious symbolism and meaning.

The atheist writer Richard Dawkins has observed that according to the findings of modern science, the universe has all the properties of a system that is utterly devoid of meaning. The main characteristic of the universe is pitiless indifference. Dawkins further argues that we human beings are simply agglomerations of molecules, assembled into functional units over millennia of natural selection, and as for the soul--well, that's an illusion!

To no one's surprise, Dawkins has not been invited to speak to the grieving Virginia Tech community. What this tells me is that if it's difficult to know where God is when bad things happen, it is even more difficult for atheism to deal with the problem of evil. The reason is that in a purely materialist universe, immaterial things like good and evil and souls simply do not exist. For scientific atheists like Dawkins, Cho's shooting of all those people can be understood in this way--molecules acting upon molecules.

If this is the best that modern science has to offer us, I think we need something more than modern science.


It is hardly surprising that Dinesh D'Souza is once again not only profoundly mistaken but also deeply offensive. But I thought it worthwhile to say something in response, not because most people would put the point in the same morally reptilian manner as D'Souza, but because there is at least some vague sense amongst people that we atheists don't quite grasp the enormity of Monday's events, that we tend towards a cold-hearted manner of thinking, that we condescend to expressions of community, meaning, or bereavement.

So I will tell you, Mr D'Souza, what I grasp and where I am to be found.

I understand why my wife was frantic on Monday morning, trying to contact me through jammed phone lines. I can still feel the tenor of her voice resonating in my veins when she got through to me, how she shook with relief and tears. I remember how my mother looked the last time she thought she might have lost a son, so I have a vivid image of her and a thousand other mothers that hasn't quite left my mind yet.

I am to be found in Lane Stadium, looking out over a sea of maroon and orange, trying not to break down when someone mentions the inviolability of the classroom and the bond between a teacher and his students. That is my classroom, Mr D'Souza, my students, my chosen responsibility in this godless life, my small office in the care of humanity and its youth.

I know that brutal death can come unannounced into any life, but that we should aspire to look at our approaching death with equanimity, with a sense that it completes a well-walked trail, that it is a privilege to have our stories run through to their proper end. I don't need to live forever to live once and to live completely. It is precisely because I don't believe there is an afterlife that I am so horrified by the stabbing and slashing and tattering of so many lives around me this week, the despoliation and ruination of the only thing each of us will ever have.

We atheists do not believe in gods, or angels, or demons, or souls that endure, or a meeting place after all is said and done where more can be said and done and the point of it all revealed. We don't believe in the possibility of redemption after our lives, but the necessity of compassion in our lives. We believe in people, in their joys and pains, in their good ideas and their wit and wisdom. We believe in human rights and dignity, and we know what it is for those to be trampled on by brutes and vandals. We may believe that the universe is pitilessly indifferent but we know that friends and strangers alike most certainly are not. We despise atrocity, not because a god tells us that it is wrong, but because if not massacre then nothing could be wrong.

I am to be found on the drillfield with a candle in my hand. "Amazing Grace" is a beautiful song, and I can sing it for its beauty and its peacefulness. I don't believe in any god, but I do believe in those people who have struggled through pain and found beauty and peace in their religion. I am not at odds with them any more than I am at odds with Americans when we sing the "Star-Spangled Banner" just because I am not American. I can sing "Lean on Me" and chant for the Hokies in just the same way and for just the same reason.

I know that the theory of natural selection is the best explanation for the emergence and development of human beings and other species. I know that our bodies are composed of flesh, bone, and blood, and cells, and molecules. I also know that this does not account for all aspects of our lives, but I know no-one who ever thought it did. That is why we have science, and novels, and friendships, and poetry, and practical jokes, and photography, and a sense of awe at the immensity of time and the planet's natural history, and walks with loved ones along the Huckleberry Trail, and atheist friends who keep kosher because, well just because, and passionate reverence for both those heroes who believed and those who did not, and have all this without needing a god to stitch together the tapestry of life.

I believe this young man was both sick and vicious, that his actions were both heinous and the result of a phenomenon that we must try to understand precisely so that we can prevent it in future. I have no sympathy for him. Given what he has done, I am not particularly sorry he has spared the world his continued existence; there was no possibility of redemption for him. You think we atheists have difficulty with the concept of evil. Quite the contrary. We can accept a description of this man as evil. We just don't think that is an explanation. That is why we are exasperated at your mindless demonology.

I feel humbled by the sense of composure of a family who lost someone on Monday. I will not insult that dignity by pretending there is sense to be made of this senselessness, or that there is some greater consolation to be found in the loss of a husband and son.

I know my students are now more than students.

You can find us next week in the bloodied classrooms of a violated campus, trying to piece our thoughts and lives and studies back together.

With or without a belief in a god, with or without your asinine bigotry, we will make progress, we will breathe life back into our university, I will succeed in explaining this or that point, slowly, eventually, in a ham-handed way, at risk of tears half-way through, my students will come to feel comfortable again in a classroom with no windows or escape route, and hell yes we will prevail.

You see Mr D'Souza, I am an atheist professor at Virginia Tech and a man of great faith. Not faith in your god. Faith in my people.

Comments 101 - 107 of 107 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

101. Comment #33811 by Veronique on April 22, 2007 at 1:24 am

 avatarHaving discovered that D'Souza used to go out with Ann Coulter, I hereby consign him to the dustbin.

Cheers
V

Other Comments by Veronique

102. Comment #33816 by Ian on April 22, 2007 at 2:10 am

If you follow the link to the professor's blog, you'll find that Dinesh D'Souza is still spouting poison about this and the poor professor is responding to his crass behaviour.

The answer to D'Souza's original question is that atheists are rendered invisible at times like this because they're not so crass to exploit the siuation for publicity.

Other Comments by Ian

103. Comment #33899 by bitbutter on April 22, 2007 at 2:14 pm

 avatar@denoir

His argument was that in time of grief people turn to religion, not atheism.


Of course. But this is a strange way of framing things. Atheism isn't obliged to offer consolation; it is after all, only an absence of a certain type of belief. It's not a belief system so i think comparing it to religion is often a non starter. Perhaps the discussion should have been about how, and whether, humanism (for example) can offer consolation to compare with what people find in religion.

I think it probably can, but that it's efficacy depends very much on the person's prior beliefs.

In other words it's not at all surprising that most people in America might turn to a religious type of consolation, because they already hold some kind of religious belief. For me, a reflection on other things would be much more effective in a time of crisis, since i don't have a religious world view.

Other Comments by bitbutter

104. Comment #33901 by Bonzai on April 22, 2007 at 2:46 pm

DeSousa might not notice this, but his (only) argument for the superiority of religion is basically that it is an effective spiritual anashetic in time of pain. That is not a particularly respectible or innovative defence for religions as belief systems. Even Marx said that religion is opium. Opium does dull your pain especially if you are already an addict.

If DeSousa has more perspective or intelligence, which I won't count on, he would be horrified that by the irony that he was echoing none other than Marx.

Other Comments by Bonzai

105. Comment #33997 by Philip1978 on April 23, 2007 at 2:43 am

 avatarmapantsula
I just want to say how sorry I am that you have been caught up in the middle of this tragedy and please keep up your good work at the school. Those kids need all the help they can get and I think you are one of the right people to be there for them in there time of need. My condolences on the horrible loss that has been inflicted on you but wish you all the best for the future, kind regards,
Philip Priestley

Other Comments by Philip1978

106. Comment #34651 by Frankus1122 on April 24, 2007 at 7:10 pm

 avatarI know I am a bit late in the game here but I too am very impressed by Mapantsula's response to D'Souza. It was rational and reasonable and sensible and passionate. Beautiful really.
There seems to be a lot of passion from the other side but not so much in the way of reason, rationality, logic, and just plain sensibleness.
I am confused about something else: Did D'Souza's second piece of writing come after reading Mapantsula's reply? If so, how could that be? If so, I think D'Souza is a bad man.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

107. Comment #101529 by Shrommer on December 20, 2007 at 1:32 pm

The point for me is not to make sense of a senseless shooting, and there is no Christian answer that can make the shooting sound like a good choice. The point is to make sense of the lives that were lost, in order to be able to call the shooting evil. If Rabadi's idea is that the only meaning is what existed in the life of each person, and then those lives are snuffed out, then all we've lost is the same meaning that is lost when any person dies of old age anyway. If, on the other hand, the shooter has sentenced people to hell by taking their lives before they had a chance to receive eternal life, then the situation is truly tragic and a blow to the Kingdom of God.

Other Comments by Shrommer
Reload Comments | Back to Top


Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password:

This article is reposted from a website that accepts comments.
Why not share your comment on the article there as well? CLICK HERE