A great set of reader emails on Sullivan’s blog, proving once again how good his system is of disallowing comments but printing good reader emails. The issues – whether the universe itself can be said to have any “relationship” with us, what is left of the old religions once our critical faculties are done dissecting them, and whether they are relevant at all anymore – are all good issues on which a great deal can be said.
I want to point out one comment which I think is typical but which I just can’t agree with: a quotation from Stanley Kubrick.
The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile but that it is indifferent; but if we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death — however mutable man may be able to make them — our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.
This is, I think, basic atheist/agnostic doctrine – the indifference of the universe, the self-reliance of man – but when I look at nature in all its phenomena, I find it utterly impossible to consent to the idea that “we must supply our own light” – I am, in general, very impressed by the light that exists in the universe independent of us. I think that our place as the consciousness of this part of the universe is a lofty one, but the Kubrick position expressed above seems to me a perfectly modern infinite self-centeredness. And in general – I see no opposition between universe and man. The “universe” is hostile, or indifferent, or loving, in about the same proportion that we are, it seems to me. I do worry about dying of hypothermia on some mountaintop because of a broken ankle or sudden rainstorm – but then again, I also worry of dying from some hunter’s bullet or some other human cause.
One Comment