English and Four Teens (standard:other, 5484 words)
Author: Sonny Harman	Added: Mar 12 2004	Views/Reads: 3162/2056	Story vote: 0.00 (0 votes)
Four teens team up to write on every subject they feel needs to be explored--philosophy, religion, faith, science, government, you name it, we probably discussed it.

Click here to read the first 75 lines of the story

there.” 

“So,” said the Student, “Who is God?” 

“He is that He is,” the Master responded. “His identity has no meaning.
He has no source. He is, He always was, and He shall forever be. God is 
His own purpose.” 

“So he willed himself into existence?” 

“Precisely. From God and nothing come everything.” 

A pause. Replied the Student, “Bullshit.” 

“Look,” said the Master, “That's the way it is.” 

“Oh?” the Student asked, faintly amused, “So an invisible man who lives
in the sky determines my destiny?” 

“No, no,” the master sighed. They were so difficult at this age. “That's
not what I said. God started it all, He made the laws. And He could 
intervene if he wanted to.” 

“Just what are you basing that belief on?” 

“Generations of philosophers and scientists,” replied the Master,
perhaps a bit smugly. 

“But isn't it said,” the Student insisted, “That the only trustworthy
source is one's own? That value judgments from those in authority are 
no more valid than those of the common man?” 

“These are not value judgments!” the Master said, losing patience. “This
is fact. It is where the world came from, where life came from, where 
even you came from.” 

“From a meaningless rock? A meaningless ape? Surely we're better than
that. I'm better than a worthless existence. No pawn of God or science 
– I'll live my own life.” 

The Student departed. The Master waited. 

* * * * * 

The alarm rings. I roll toward the sound, reaching over to flip the
switch while blinking sleep from my eyes. I'd been up till 2 the 
previous morning writing a dreadful English paper, and the world looks 
foggy and red. Finally heaving myself out of bed, I pull on some 
clothes and stumble down the hall to the waiting box of Frosted Flakes. 


The Frosted Flakes, though, did not give me the sugary kick I was
looking for. I ended up walking around that day, still nearly as red 
eyed and tired as I had been when I first stumbled out of bed. I could 
not shake the dream I had last night, though. Something about the way 
the world works, and I am a skeptic. The master and his student. The 
beginning of the universe, spun out of nothing by the will of god, the 
creator. 

But something about it was different than what is usually taught; We
have to be the center, the purpose, the reason for the Universe to 
exist. God created the Universe for us, we say, because we need to feel 
important. The reality is so much more bleak. My dream seemed closer to 
the truth...thousands of thousands of stars and planets created not by 
a God who cares about humans, but whose abstract existence is merely to 
give an explanation for the existence of the Universe. 

It's all a load of crap. God, the meaning of life, the purpose of our
existence. How small am I to the rest of the Universe? I am nothing. 
Would the Universe care if the rest of the world exploded? If humanity 
ceased to exist? No. There is no God; there is only the cold, hard 
logic of science. 

**** 

“How many faiths are there in the world? Does anybody know? Can anybody
name a few of them? Well, we start with the major religions; 
Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, all are unique in their 
beliefs.” 

“Christianity teaches that everyone who doesn't believe in Jesus Christ
as the son of God will go to hell or purgatory, doesn't it?” 

“Why, yes, Carl, that's true.” 

“Well doesn't that mean that all Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and
everyone who is not a Christian going to hell or purgatory?” 

“Well, that could be your opinion, but many also believe that God has a
place in heaven for all who have led a just, if slightly misguided 
life.” 

“But that is just an opinion. How can it be a fact if many different and
people believe in something different?” 

“Well, I...” 

“Furthermore, how do the Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims feel about their
own faith? They don't think that they are misguided. There are many 
more people in the world who think that Christianity is misguided than 
Christians themselves.” 

“Um, that's a difficult...” 

“I mean, how can we legitimately say that our God exists and their God
or Gods don't? They believe that our God doesn't exist and their God or 
Gods do. So who is correct? We are defining the Universe, here, there 
must be a right answer, it cannot change between individuals. There 
must be a solid Truth.” 

“Carl, are you saying that the God my parents have believed in, and
their parents have believed in, and my whole family has believed in for 
generations just doesn't exist?” 

“Children, please...” 

“Does you and your families God exist while billions of other people's
Gods don't? Is your family somehow more enlightened than everybody 
else? The point is that everybody is trying to define the truth, and 
yet because everyone's beliefs are contradictory to everyone else's, 
how can any of it be true?” 

**** 

I figured I was going to go to hell after Carl got done chewing out the
teacher.  Everything he said was so convincing that surely no one faith 
could be right.  And even if whatever god there is forgives the 
misguided, then people who don't belong to any faith would still end up 
in hell.  And, being one of those people, I wasn't sure I so much liked 
being an atheist anymore. 

I was originally drawn to atheism by doubts in my religious upbringing
and the desire not to be obligated to what I was supposed to believe.  
Every religion I could think of required things of its followers: 
christians had to go to church every Sunday and cannibalize this guy 
Jesus.  Jews had to go to temple every Friday night, wear little hats 
on their heads, and observe dietary restrictions which changed 
depending on the time of year.  Muslims had to pray towards Mecca, some 
place they may not yet have seen, several times a day, and eventually 
go there on a pilgrimage of great religious value.  Hindus had to build 
shrines to their assorted gods in their homes, not to mention keep 
track of all the assorted gods and what they were responsible for.  And 
it always seemed that each other religion I could think of required 
their followers to do ridiculous things. 

Couldn't religion just be spiritual without having to be ritualistic? 
Why couldn't people just believe in things without having to do 
nonsensical things to affirm it?  I suppose that's why Carl believed so 
fully in science and so blatantly shot down religion.  And I suppose 
that's why I didn't follow any religion at all.  But it wasn't because 
I thought science was entirely right.  I just thought that people 
followed these crackpot religions because they needed to.  They needed 
something to believe in.  Sure, the chances of some stellar being 
creating the world entirely for us were ludicrous.  But if it gave 
people an explanation for our existence beyond dumb luck, then it was 
acceptable to them.  As for me, I just didn't know.  I wasn't alive 
when the world was created, and I doubted I'd be alive when it was 
destroyed, so I really didn't take any interest in the creation.  I 
suppose it's feasible that all the matter in the universe exploded out 
of a small dot, but that sounds about as plausible as the “big man in 
the sky” theory.  Either way, I was an atheist not because I thought 
religion was wrong, but because I thought it was dumb. 

But then Carl shot all of it down in class.  He took a stand against
religion, forging a path in the name of science.  And I figured that 
was fine... but I couldn't get the teacher's words out of my head: 
	“God has a place in heaven for all who have led a just, if slightly 
misguided life.”  I tried my best to sum up the situation: if Carl was 
right about science governing the universe, then when I died I would be 
lost in the void, and my body would rot away as my essence vanished 
into nothingness.  I would cease to exist.  But if the teacher was 
right, then as an atheist I would be banished into the fiery depths of 
hell for all eternity.  They both seemed pretty bleak. 

**** 

The alarm clock on my nightstand buzzed aloud and flashed its large
green readouts in an effort to wake me from yet another dream.  Slowly 
I regained consciousness, the gray haze of the world forming the walls 
and doors I knew so well, and all sounds fading to the loud screech of 
morning.  I lazily threw my arm in the direction of the noise to shut 
the damn thing off, hitting the lamp and day-to-day calendar before 
finally finding the switch.  And as my room filled with silence once 
again, I drifted back into a sound sleep, where I spent the rest of my 
Saturday morning dreaming of the family I had left behind in 
Tallahassee. 

Tallahassee? I wasn't from Tallahassee. How very strange. The dream
seemed real enough, I mean, I had a mother, a father, brothers and 
sisters, a pet giraffe, the usual things a dearly beloved son could 
ever want. I had no worries, no fears, nothing could touch me while I 
was in this place. So until 7:30 I had a lovely time. Then my real 
mother completely destroyed the dream one. Bummer. Now I had to get 
dressed and go to another day of work. Yes, another. Would they ever 
end? The answer was, of course, yes, but how could a teenager like me 
ever see that? 

So I went to work, nearly fell asleep, came back home, did fall asleep,
and dreamed once more of the family I had left behind in Tallahassee. 
Or was it Memphis? I couldn't remember, nor did I care. This time, 
though, the dream had a more... imaginative... ending. My dream-family 
and I spiraled off into Hell, only to be spat back out again into...I 
woke up sweating. Perhaps faith isn't such a bad thing. Something my 
pastor once told me, a very long time ago, surfaces. If there is a 
heaven and a hell, and faith will lead to one and doubt to another, 
then faith will see me into heaven, but if there is nothing, both faith 
and doubt will be useless. So what's the harm in a little faith? None, 
really. But could I really have faith in what I couldn't see, or worse 
yet, could I have faith in a deity so easily mocked, so easily scorned, 
so easily dismissed? I didn't know. I could save these thoughts for 
another day. The day started about noon for me, just after the cartoons 
I nearly missed from sleeping in so late. After my little bout of faith 
versus doubt, I grabbed a bite to eat and headed for other issues on my 
schedule---my homework. Yippee. Hooray. Homework. I just love homework. 
There's Chem, History, and Math. The first and last I can deal with, 
they're both on my list of favorite-things-to-do, but I just can't seem 
to wrap my head around why all these dead people made such stupid 
mistakes. Oh well, hindsight is perfect, and sarcasm doesn't solve any 
problems. Today, we have to read about the moral and psychological 
implications of the Nazi movement in Germany. That's not so bad as to 
warrant a groan. The whole idea of it is that Nazism, because of its 
militaristic and totalitarian aims, used the masses as a way to 
manipulate the individual in the masses, namely by removing their 
individual thought---this action or that six million or so deaths was 
for the good of the Aryan race, Germany, and the whole entire world, 
once it was under reign of the Third Reich, of course. It reminds me 
almost of going to school as a kid---the crowd of children could mock 
the strangest one with no feeling of guilt because they were part of a 
group---no blame could be put on their shoulders alone. I saw it happen 
all the time, when I was a kid. I'll leave it at that. 

My homework's done, so it's time for a little more napping, or thinking,
in my case. I still feel that there's something more to say about God 
and religion. Why should I fit into a religious mold? Wouldn't faith be 
enough? Faith, and the simple guidelines set down in every major 
religion in the world: The Ten Commandments, or something akin to them. 
These ten commandments sent from God are supposed to be the main focal 
point of following God and living life. Simple, yet profound. A set of 
ten rules to live life by, without argument. I follow them myself, most 
of the time unknowingly. Would these in addition to faith be enough? 
Perhaps. What God to believe in, though? Allah, Yahweh, Jesus 
(apparently part of a Holy Trinity that's still one supreme being), all 
of these deities, and no idea which was the right one. All of them 
differ only by a slight margin of rules— diet, prayer, or language of 
prayer. Time to move on. I feel the urge to speak on... Love, the 
subject that causes the greatest joys and griefs of mankind, seems like 
such a simple thing, does it not? You love a person, and that's that. 
And that makes everything better, right? Since clearly something is 
missing. Religion, that can't be it, can it? So many possibilities, 
none of them feeling quite right. Endless proofs for and against God. 
But have faith, my pastor says. I do, I don't doubt God... but is mine 
the right way to worship him? What if the real God is the Old Testament 
version, and the increasing value of human life since then has infused 
Him with false compassion? Is ours the original or the modern God? It 
doesn't hurt to have faith, but what if when we die it turns out that 
the One True Faith is some obscure cult? Perhaps one that dislikes my 
faith, and then what? 

It's pretty clear that I'm not going to get anywhere trying to find the
truth this way. I feel a bit ashamed to give up so easily where 
generations of philosophers have persevered, but I need to wonder how 
much closer to the truth they are than I. At the risk of sounding like 
an average American, what makes his opinion more valid than the next 
man's? 

Of course I cannot criticize intellectualism, I'll probably end up a
philosopher... or a physicist... or a potter... or an ubergeek... or an 
astronomer... or a historian... or a chemist... or a photojournalist... 
or an archeologist...or an astronaut... 

Now, back to the question, what's missing? First, to follow good ol'
Plato, we should prove that something is indeed missing. That's rather 
hard to do logically. But try this experiment. Right now. Sit down, 
though you probably already are, and think about this. How old are you? 
Divide that by your expected lifespan – about 80 years if you're lucky 
– and that's the percentage of your life that's over. Have you 
accomplished anything in that time? What did you want to do when you 
were young and sure of yourself and confident that nothing could bog 
you down? Have you done it, any of it? Are you proud of yourself? 

Now take that percentage you got. Subtract it from 100. That's the
percentage of your life you have left, give or take a bit. And keep in 
mind that, most likely, during the bulk of that time you won't be at 
your best. You may be drooling in a wheelchair. Or working in a 
cubicle. Or you could die early – that happens to a lot of people. Any 
regrets? Not everyone gets to be as astronaut. Odds are, it won't be 
you. You're not good enough. Your life isn't perfect, and it's your 
fault. Bad things happen to people who can't overcome them. 

And then that goddamn voice in the back of my head says, “Surprise!
You're 17! And you're like everyone else!” And I wonder if brain damage 
would be so unpleasant after all. 

And fundamentally, I am like everyone else, aren't I? I have the same
goals, really, I want what everyone wants. A home, a girl, plenty of 
opportunities, all the education I want, a bit of money, a Pentium 4 
3.20 GHz 800MHz FSB system with 2 GB RAM, a 200 GB hard drive, and a 
nice 54x32x54x CD-RW. Perhaps a bit geekier than some lives, but 
without the hardware it's the American Dream. Pretty much everyone can 
appreciate the appeal of this life - it's what we want. And anyone who 
can work hard, save their pennies, and follow the rules can get ahead 
here in the good ol' US of A. 

Silly humans, we try and try to make ourselves noteworthy as
individuals; we strive for the elusive “success” package  by attaining 
knowledge, power, love, and money. But why do we strive for this 
besides material satisfaction and “happiness”, which nobody seems to be 
able to define? I think that the key to our desires is standing out. We 
want to be known, respected, and remembered, because we know that 
outside of the interactions we make with our fellow humans, our lives 
are meaningless. To truly achieve this, though, is to be better, in 
some facet of life, than everybody else, which of course only a select 
few people can actually do. More importantly, are they who will go down 
in history ever happier than everyone else? 

I myself have dreams of grandeur; everybody daydreams about being famous
or exceptional, about everyone respecting and caring about them. But 
when someone comes close to achieving these dreams, are they as a 
result happier than any average guy can be? An average man with an 
average family and an average home with average paychecks every average 
month can still feel good about himself and still be happy. Therefore, 
our dreams become all the more irrelevant. 

So, yes, you can define your life by how many of your dreams and goals
you accomplish, realizing that the basis of everyone's dreams are same, 
but in reality it doesn't matter if you do or you don't. What would 
happen to the world, though, if everybody realized that their dreams 
and goals are pointless and somehow (though this is very unrealistic) 
managed to convince themselves not to strive for that goal of personal 
success? The world would stop working. Everyone would no longer work 
for anything but survival, and there would be no drive to do anything 
else. So yes, the striving is meaningless, but apparently necessary. 

And yet (there is always an “and yet”), the reason for nearly all of
humanities problems is the selfishness, arrogance, self-centeredness, 
and even ignorance that are all caused by the striving for success. 
Early in humanities history, nations developed and were ruled by kings. 
These systems of governing proved to be horribly unfair and unjust, and 
so they have since been replaced. But why didn't they work? I would 
have thought that whenever a man or woman would come to a place of 
power and responsibility that he or she would have to rise to the sense 
of duty and do all of the best things for his or her people. Those 
ruler's must also realize that, in serving the people as a ruler to the 
best of his or her ability gives the people more incentive and ability 
to work harder and the economy to run smother, strengthening the 
nation, the government, and ultimately the ruler him or herself. But 
that was not the case, as in so many cases the rulers would become 
power-hungry and corrupt and fail to serve the people. Is the Democracy 
of today all that much better? It is characterized by the “Checks and 
Balances” system, where different powers and responsibilities fall on 
different people, and no one man or woman holds all of the power. This 
government, though, seems to only be united in one thing; individual 
self-serving. Arguably, self-preservation is just as important as 
fulfilling individual responsibilities to the best of ones ability; 
such is the argument of corrupt individual members of government who 
make it their priority to earn lots of money for many of the things 
they do. 

Yet there must be an underlying meaning for all that humanity tries to
accomplish, or else we long since would have realized our own futility. 
 Even the mere fact that people refuse to accept existentialism is 
proof enough that it lacks foundation.  If it were truly acceptable to 
all, a clear and strong reminder of just how pointless our lives are, 
then it would have caught on, and as a worldwide trend everyone would 
simply surrender to the futility of human activity.  No one would ever 
bother to do anything, because it wouldn't matter.  But humanity has 
its own way of viewing things. 

There are those people that subscribe to existentialism, that believe
humanity is utterly pointless.  And to an extent, they are right: the 
universe is a pretty damn big place, and we inhabit one measly little 
planet.  But who is to say that small and un-noteworthy are equivalent 
to meaningless?  Is it not true that every atom in a molecule is 
necessary to make it?  Changing  one molecule in a DNA strand makes the 
difference between humans and chimpanzees; might also the eradication 
of Earth hold some cosmic consequence? 

But I'll back up for a second here.  The refutation of existentialism
keeps this world running: if no one believed their actions had a 
purpose, no one would continue to perform them.  This belief is 
necessary.  And it may be possible, just maybe, that the purpose of 
humanity does not fit on a global or even a cosmic scale.  Humanity is 
currently, after all, limited to one planet.  Maybe this pointless 
hustle and bustle that keeps the world working IS the meaning of life.  
Isn't it true, after all, that the only reason we try to succeed is to 
be happy?  To different people, happiness means different things, and 
their individual goals reflect this.  People who are happy with lots of 
money clamber their way up the capitalist ladder and run corporations.  
People who are happy living a simple life on a farm become food 
suppliers.  People who are happy with anything as long as they've got 
their families often perform the blue-collar work necessary to keep 
everything going.  And everything falls naturally into place (at least 
as far as capitalism is concerned).  The pursuit of happiness runs the 
world, and maybe that's what humanity is here for.  Not to realize some 
cosmic vision, just to be happy and keep everything working while they 
do it. 

Existentialism never made sense to me for those reasons.  I've always
made a point of believing that humanity has some purpose, even if it be 
only to survive.  And the more people try to explain that humanity is 
pointless, the angrier I always get, because there's no way to back it 
up.  If humanity has no point, then you can't prove there is a point.  
And if it is impossible to prove something's existence beyond mere 
belief, then it is likewise impossible to prove its absence.  
Conversely, if humanity does have some greater purpose, we obviously 
don't know it yet.  And we may never know it.  But you can't prove or 
disprove something you don't know; it's infeasible.  Either way the 
coin falls, there is no solution: regardless of whether humanity has a 
purpose, no one will be able to prove it either way. 

The only solution to this problem is to assume the correctness of one or
the other.  Since neither can be proven, it's six on one and half a 
dozen on the other.  Really, it comes down to the fact that the purpose 
of humanity isn't decided.  It's all a matter of opinion. But whose 
opinion will solve the matter? Certainly not anyone's that I know of. 
Yet the people I discuss this with say that every question must, and 
always will, have only one completely unique and correct answer. So WHO 
WILL DECIDE? The answer: humanity already has. The choice: 
neither—humanity has chosen that neither solution is correct, and 
hence, some other solution must be reached, but apparently no one in 
this day and age can see beyond their own stuporous existence to the 
greater body of living proof—that LIFE STILL GOES ON. If life, in its 
infinite detail and complexity, really adds up to nothing, then life 
itself is unaware of its unneeded existence, in clear defiance of any 
manmade, superficial, nihilist philosophical viewpoint. The universe, 
as a nigh infinite and yet infinitesimal in detail place of wonder, is 
home to who knows what, and since no modern technique is available to 
study a nearly infinite place, such as the universe we inhabit, no 
simple conclusion of “nothing matters” can be reached. 

This fact, in conjunction with the fact that not a single human being is
capable of knowing everything there is to know at one point in time, 
forces the observation of: What else don't we know? This question leads 
down some very interesting paths: for instance, could God exist, and 
would he actually be a she, or would it be of neutral sex, holding no 
innate opinion of which gender is better or worse (I'm not making any 
suggestions here, I'm just asking a few questions). Would there have 
been a possibility for this supreme being to have a Son, in human form 
, with certain alien, supernatural powers? Would this lone 
immortal-turned-mortal be the gateway into paradise, that simple and 
everlasting faith in a God and a Son and a Holy Ghost would grant that 
person eternal life in some form or another? Would this eternal life, 
if in fact eternal and infinite, would it be a spiritual or physical 
immortality, or would it simply be a happy existence for a short time? 
Would this faith transcend all boundaries of time and space? What else 
transcends the boundaries of time and space? Could there be life out 
there that could do that? Could there be other life out there period? 
Would it be similar to life on Earth, or would it be completely 
different to such an extent the "life" as we define could not and would 
not apply—hence the term "alien." Could this life already know of us, 
or have we already met them? 

You see the dilemma in simply existing as a mere mortal on this
supposedly puny planet in the middle of some side-galaxy with no real 
importance? Should humanity ever reach the stars, will it be able to 
survive with the questions it already has answered, or will humanity as 
a whole simply lose its essence, the loss of humanity by humanity 
itself? A disturbing question, which has no immediate answer—I can, 
however, speculate. Every so often, you hear of the occasional movie or 
TV series that brings up madness caused by the depths of the ocean or 
vastness of space. Now, while a certain amount of these people is 
certainly unavoidable, there is no guarantee that these few will be the 
cause for the loss of humanity by all. Or would these disturbing 
symptoms be "contagious," easily spread from person to person, similar 
to what happens in a mob—one person acts as the trigger, and the crowd 
is the gun. But certainly these anomalies, if you will, won't cause a 
nearly instantaneous breakdown of society, morality, and humanity (as 
in the traits associated with being humane)? Space is a far way off, 
and there is no way to tell. 

All these questions point to the lack of knowledge, not the lack of
understanding, in all of humanity, not just in a select few (such as 
ourselves, the people responsible for this argument). This lack forces 
every person not neglectful of their part in the whole to pursue 
knowledge—in the humanities, the sciences, and so on. Human drive is 
the reason for it all—humans driven to understand,  to grasp, to learn, 
to grow.


Tweet