Converts, Wed, Jan 30 2013 #(560)

Jan 30, 2013

Professor Dawkins,

I'd like to first extend my profound thanks to you for the bravery and tenacity with which you've approached the task of spreading truth and reason over non truth and mysticism. I have always been intellectually curious about the workings of the world, this curiosity weaved itself through my life at an early age and started the foundations of my search for understanding using science as a tool. However as a son of deeply religious parents I found myself at odds during my teen years on how to approach the tentative “faith” which I held in a watching God and the mounting body of knowledge that I was acquiring as I attended school. In an effort to ensure I received the “best” education my parents sent me and my siblings to Catholic elementary school despite the fact their religion was Evangelistic Protestantism, so I was fully inculcated into the rituals of the Catholic Church and the Protestant church simultaneously. This was the cauldron of questions in which my present understanding was given birth, as time went by I questioned the differences in rituals and religious expression between the two groups, I pondered on the origins of their views and this led to investigation of other religions. As years went by my faith slowly but surely peeled back the domain of reality that a God could possibly inhabit. As a student of science (I studied Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in both High School and College) the rational truths trumped the statements of faith that I was told to hold in church. As I approached the time to enter the world as a professional in 1998 I was ready to also let go the vestiges of “faith” in a watching God. The process in me came in a slow evolution of having a receptive mind to rational ideas and having a relentless inquisitive nature tied to being immersed in heavily religious home and school environments, slowly as I accumulated knowledge the possibilities of a watching God naturally relaxed until I reached my present state of absolute agnosticism. As a strict practitioner of the scientific method and ideals I can not call myself an atheist as my disbelief in a creating God is premised only one the preponderance of empirical facts that counter such an entities existence. I can only say that such a “God” is extremely unlikely based on the evidence available.

The semantic distinction between Atheism and Agnosticism aside I wanted to say that a better name for this corner would be “Hall of the Enlightened”. The process of slowly acquiring data and testing those data to determine the facts of reality is how I came to my present understanding, I was not “converted” as the use of that word implies that there is a parity between thiestic ideas and rationalist ones. It also implies that one was forced in some way to change their views, the impetus for my enlightenment was simply truth. I am enlightened.

Thank You again for your work in this area, as a fellow enlightened being I continue my journey to bring the realization of dispassionate truth to every one that is receptive to truth.


David Saintloth

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.