American Heathen®

There has been a little article that I’ve been working on involving belief versus non-belief that I’ve been trying to finish.  And in working on that article, I came across two separate stories about the subject that I wanted to use.  The first one fit perfectly with the main argument and was simple to explain.  But the second one is one that I REALLY wanted to include in the article but just couldn’t do it without losing readers on the subject, because the point is so subtle, and it involves some thinking on behalf of the reader.

So I’ll go ahead and give it to you here…

The owner and manager of a men’s clothing store was called out front because of an argument between his best salesman and one of his best clients.

The salesman was a seasoned pro in the world of fashion.  He could find the right clothes to make a person look and feel like a million bucks.

The client was a tenured astronomer at the local university, one of the finest minds in the area, twice nominated for the Nobel Award, and with an IQ of 140.

And yet, despite their intelligence and professionalism, the two of them were almost at each other’s throats over something that the manager wanted to get to the bottom of quickly.  So he pulled them aside and talked with both of them.  They both gave pretty much the same story from their own perspectives.

The scientist entered the store and told the salesman that he needed to get a complete set of clothes.  He was going to be putting on an exhibit at the planetarium and he needed to dress appropriately.  He specifically requested that the clothes he gets were without any kind of color.

The salesman nods, says he knows exactly what the scientist has in mind and shows him a wide variety of shirts and slacks.  The scientist would look at the clothes, then give a disapproving nod and say that they looked good but were not in the color he requested.  The salesman then would then point him to another set of shirts and slacks, but still the scientist would only say that they were not in the color he specifically requested.  The salesman tried every shade and stripe, and yet the scientist did not approve of the choice.  The salesman even pulled out clothes from the back that hadn’t even been put on the racks yet, but the scientist would simply say that, while they looked nice, they weren’t in the specific color he requested.

And that is when the argument truly started, as the salesman felt slighted by the scientist’s seemingly unrealistic expectation and then asked him to clarify what the scientist considered to be the “specific color”.

So now, my intelligent readers, you need to put your thinking caps on and figure out the riddle between the scientist and the clothing store salesman.

What color was the salesman trying to sell the scientist? And why couldn’t the two of them agree on what the “specific color” is?

It’s a simple question when it comes to what you believe in.

Are you willing to be wrong?

Believer or non-believer… are you so sure about what you believe in that you are willing to be wrong?

Let’s suppose that tomorrow there is a 500km asteroid that hits the planet.  (Yeah, like you think NASA would spot it in time, right?  Or that we’d be notified of it?)  We’re all toast in a matter of minutes.  There is no last-minute team of crackpots and astronauts launching to save the world with an Aerosmith soundtrack and some Made-For-Fox patriotic montages.  Morgan Freeman will not be promising to rebuild.  We wouldn’t even have time to meet with that long-lost family member that we disowned just so we could forgive them for being jerks.  There would be no shelters or arks that would save humanity.  There wouldn’t be any time for them.  We’d be dead.  All of us.  Well, okay, maybe the folks at the International Space Station would live, but not for long.  They would run out of air and food eventually and there wouldn’t be any left here to get.

Let’s suppose that out of some freak of cosmic nature, we are all given one minute (60 human seconds) after we are all toast to be told the ultimate universal truth of who was RIGHT about the hereafter.  (I know it’s not a physical possibility, but work with me on this one, okay atheists?)  If A certain belief is right about the hereafter, we all find ourselves subject to their judgment after that minute… and if the atheists are right, then after the minute is up, it’s just game over.

If the non-believers are right, that would suck for the believers, wouldn’t it?  I mean, sure they might live virtuous lives and all, but that’s it.  And think of all of the stuff that they miss out on.  No sex before marriage… no booze… no eating certain foods… all of that money spent on donations… 60 seconds of denial, anger, and some regret… and then game over.

But if A certain belief turns out to be right, does it mean that ALL believers win?  No.

For starters, A belief does not necessarily mean that YOUR belief is the one that is right.  Obviously if it is your belief then you get to gloat.  But you have to consider that with all of these different faiths, all of these different interpretations, all of these different dogmas, that any one of them COULD be the “right” one.  Wouldn’t that be an ethereal kick in the mouth to find out that one of those little cult groups that you used to make fun of gets the free pass and you don’t?

And what happens to you then?  You would probably be subject to whatever rule the “right” one has about non-believers.   Again, great if YOUR belief is the one that gets the nod, but sucks if you aren’t.

Or maybe none of them get it!  Maybe NONE of the current faiths are the right one.

Imagine finding out in that cosmic “grace minute” that the “right” belief was one that was practiced 1500 years ago in Europe that ended up being hunted down and driven to extinction by followers of YOUR faith.  Boy that would REALLY be an awkward moment wouldn’t it?  Good luck explaining that one.

But the believers I converse with don’t think such things… because they have it in their minds that they are right.  Being “wrong” doesn’t even factor into the equation, because as far as they are concerned, they are RIGHT… PERIOD!

And if by some astronomically remote chance that they aren’t “the ones”, then they have a couple of ways they try to “game” the system.

The first is the neutralization and minimization of any other belief.  This is the reason why they feel the need to have governments large and small endorse and sanction their beliefs at every corner and have symbols of THEIR faith at every plot of land and every piece of property.  It’s more than just ego-gratification and narcissism-by-proxy.  If everything in the world says that “X-belief” is the only one out there, then it goes that the followers of “X-belief” win.  Or at least that’s the theory.

It’s essentially a “win” by attrition and branding.  But it presupposes that the “X-belief” curries favor with that supreme being, because if not then they just condemned everyone on the planet.

The second way is sort of a “pass”.  It’s a fallback to the attrition/branding effort.  Think of it as a “Get Out Of Oblivion Free” card.  It operates on the assertion that even if your faith is not “the chosen” faith that you still curry favor with the ultimate cosmic power simply by being the best that you can and that it should be “good enough” to get you in.

Let’s say that you’re a Baptist and the Lutherans end up being “the” faith.  All you have to do is say “hey, we’re all Christians!  I’m a Christian.  They’re Christians.  We should be allowed in anyway.”

Unless, of course, it’s YOUR belief that is “the” belief.  Then you’re not-so generous about it, are you?  No, usually you’re the one that would be saying “HEY, they may be Christians, but they’re not the RIGHT kind of Christians!  They’re not like us!  Go suck brimstone with the rest of the losers!”

BUT that’s only presuming that they could even possibly be WRONG… which they will firmly tell you that they are most certainly NOT!

That’s not to say that the atheists are any better at this.  Some of them can be very boisterous in their convictions not just that they are RIGHT, but that those who believe are WRONG.  However at least they know what is at stake here.  They’re not trying to hedge their bets or to game the system.  (By the way, atheists, please don’t get into this whole “non-belief is not a belief” debacle.  That’s a subject for future discussion.)

So it all goes back to my original question… are you confident enough in your belief to not just be RIGHT, because it’s easy to be right, but also be willing to be WRONG?

IF it turns out that what you believe is not right, IF it turns out that the path to salvation was not a road but a cliff, are you confident enough to be willing to accept the consequences?  That’s what it is to be willing to be WRONG.

Remember, that huge rock could fall tomorrow.

Just a little something for people of any kind of belief to ponder.