Regardless of the obsolete claim and declaration of atheism among civil and educated circles, the whirlwinds of the media and the flatness of knowledge soon bring us back to this scandalous debate in the free/seductive world for beginners in knowledge. Although between the atheist and the monotheist there is nothing more than the letter “lam” and “waw” from the etymological point of view, some broken (at) insist on “eliminate” and consider public atheism as an expression of other purposes and ends that can be more degrading… and we are forced to return to this discussion…
The reason for this talk is that a famous hypothetical activist converted, a few months ago and without introductions, in the midst of a vast and thorny debate that surpasses her and her many followers, and beyond media knowledge characterized by monotony and indiscretion… the discussion of freedom of belief, or transferring that old and renewed dialectic, atheism and society… it seems that the question is as if the long and bloody history between believers and infidels needed such a station… Also, it seems that a radical and avant-garde intellectual revolution at once… or a solution to the “backward and reactionary” society and a path for its rebirth.
Any researcher would not exaggerate when he said that the religious phenomenon is the oldest symbolic phenomenon known to humanity and that it still exists, to this day; If not dominant.
Those who say that the class struggle is the engine of history do not understand the great transformation that Constantine made in Roman society, from paganism to Christianity in the apostolic way… Only because he became a believer… Because there have always been forces larger than dialectics and history, “metascientific” forces. “We can describe it as a miracle that gives religion its root and its eternal authority. The heavy history of religions is not a stage for the curious and the ignorant. The jurists, the scholars of history, the human being, the sociologist, soul, structuralists, interpreters, rhetoricians, grammarians, semioticians, writers, and mystics all spent long lives fighting, dissecting, judging, and even condemning religion instead, its followers are growing and the justifying jurisprudence is in permanent recovery.
How do beliefs take root in human consciousness? How do faith and reason revolve in an infinite orbit of existence and non-existence? So by what rational, free and secular mechanisms can we transcend our forefathers in theology, logic and creedal origins from the Mu’tazilites to Ibn Rushd, Hussein Marwa, Al-Arawi and Al-Tayyib Tizini? Or how can Taha Hussein, Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid, Youssef Al-Siddiq and others whose epistemic structure is strong and established be surpassed? Finally, does this have anything to do with politics? Does unbelief in the one who rules the heavens necessarily mean unbelief in the one who rules the earth?
Decades ago, Marxists circulated in their veiled discussions a famous phrase by George Pulitzer: Marxism is not a dogma; Rather, it is a method of thought… The phrase has, of course, been coined (due to the oral dominance of the Arab Marxist heritage…) and has also become obsolete as atheism obsolete.
What I remember from old texts that I read during university days is that Diderot, with his majesty and his foundational position in the history of atheism, published his articles under a pseudonym that could be researched on the subject. Approaching the spirit and faith of people is very dangerous, to the point that a thinker of the stature of Karl Marx, during his edition of the Communist Manifesto, wrote his widely circulated phrase, “Religion is the opium of the people” accompanied and followed by another phrase, “the sigh of the oppressed.” Thus, the historically oppressed sentence remains as follows: Religion is the opium of the people and the sigh of the oppressed… Marx himself did not dare… Not out of fear; Rather, they are an understanding of the engine of history and the quality of the mode of production, based on an innovative dialectic that is summed up in the Marxist principle: existence determines consciousness, not consciousness that determines existence. the new atheists).
Regardless of the history of the failed atheists who stupidly fell under the guillotine… the smart atheists were more genius in passing to “the absence of God” through science and philosophy… Therefore, it is not possible surpass Copernicus in disbelief, for example. ; Because he saw atheism in the rotation of the earth… Or Freud; Because he entered through the subconscious, or Darwin; Because he simply considered that man is not the highest creature.
Even when atheism emerged as a struggling movement across various geographies and historical twists, it appeared as the required arena. Once to resist dogma, and once to confront the injustice coming out of churches, mosques, inns, and places of worship, or to question the mysterious and ambiguous of sacred texts.
Does manifest atheism for the individual benefit the group? Yes, maybe… Only in the secular case, where the law becomes the state religion… In short, state atheism can benefit…
In our daily lives and through our many paths in life, we meet respected atheists and non-religious people, who calmly and deliberately argued, and with firmness of ideas and firmness of knowledge, who justified their position of denying and denying to God through philosophy. , logic and dialectics, expressing their beliefs with sublime elegance..
In the days when atheists were mysterious and secretive people, who read thick and complex books, and in the days when the titles were just a lesson in epistemology… the days when the ignorant did not dare to delve into the metaphysics, and vermin were worried about what was between his legs..
Where instincts and priorities rule and whims, boredom and bees, as al-Shahristani called them, triumph, but it is a heavy joke of history that adventurers or daredevils emerge from time to time, starting from scientifically and historically shaky ground , in an attempt to scandalize the group and split it by heading towards the most sacred. There is no doubt that atheism is in danger.
Although it is a debate that began to rot, in the words of the jurists; Society still faces other obstacles that are more important than heresy, cynicism and deaf defiance of the invisible and the beliefs of people without a bright idea. The denial of God does not save from the pain of wandering.