From: shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff)
Subject: Re: Why I became an Athiest (was: frustrations with christianity)
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 13:36:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.224704.7444@netcom.com> madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:
>shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes: >

I wrote:
>>Maddi's initial posting suggested that the reason she adopted atheism
>>was that she found her family's practice of Judaism unsatisfactory.
>

Maddi responded:
>Actually, I said that was what started my questioning.

I stand corrected.



I wrote:
>>But when a person writes that they are atheists because they found
>>Judaism unappealing -- and come to that conclusion after intensive
>>study of Jewish practice and tradition -- I am bothered; I would
>>like to assume that a person who truly understands Judaism would
>>not find atheism appealing.

Maddi responded:
>Perhaps your assumptions are based on emotion rather than fact.
>Certainly I am not the only one to have turned away.

My assumptions are _certainly_ based on emotions.  Many have turned
away.  Many have not.

I wrote:
>>Maddi's statement was, however, less compelling.  She did not (so
>>far as I can tell) study Judaism intensely.  Instead, she adopted
>>atheism based primarily on very limited exposure to serious Judaism.
>>Using that as a rationale for atheism does a disservice to atheism
>>as well as to Judaism. 
>
>Since you are not familiar with how much studying I did, I  do
>believe your statement is misinformed.  In my first post I mentioned
>I did a lot of study on my own.  In another post I made today, I
>also mentioned the discussions I had with a Chabod rabbi when I was
>24.  While my family's practice of Judaism might be described as
>Pick-and-Choose Judaism Lite, this does not mean I did not do
>quite a bit of reading, studying, and, yes, soul-searching.

The issue is not _whether_ you studied, but _how much_.  Very few
people who have studied Judaism intensely (i.e., spending many
years studying and practicing intensely) turn away.  Similarly,
very few people who study atheism intensely (i.e., spending many
years studying and practicing intensely) turn away from atheism.

I wrote:
>>Imagine what convinced atheists would say if I entered alt.atheism
>>with some weak arguments against it based on what had happened to
>>me when I was 6 or 10 or 15 years old; they would -- with justification --
>>tell me to go back and study atheism first.  (Read the alt.atheism
>>FAQ; that is exactly what they assert.)

Maddi responded:
>This is a false dichotomy.  It takes about 30 minutes to read all
>five a.a. FAQ files.  I have spent years studying Judaism, and yet
>you say it is not enough.  This is an unfair comparison.  How much
>study is "enough" for you to believe that I have enough information
>to choose fairly?
>
>Incidently, what "weak arguments" did you have in mind for a
>posting to a.a.?  I think you are mistakenly implying that atheism
>is a religion.  It is not.

I did not imply that atheism was a religion.  What did I mean by a 
weak argument.  Either the blind watchmaker or Pascal's wager strike
me as weak arguments I have often heard that "prove the bankruptcy of
atheism."

>>Thus, Maddi, if you find atheism appealing, I won't argue with you.
>>But attributing your atheism to Judaism's weaknesses is unfair to
>>Judaism (given your limited exposure to serious Jewish practice)
>>and demeans atheism (since it implies you adopted it out of ignorance
>>about Judaism).
>
>This is a misprepresentation.  I did not attribute my atheism to
>Judaism's weakness per se.  I attribute it to a Do As I Say Not
>As I Do upbringing, and disgust with Religion in General, NOT
>Judaism specifically.  Furthermore, your continuous reassertion that
>I am ignorant about Judaism is false no many how many times you
>repeat it.  (Argumentum ad Nauseum)  Again, my biggest objection
>to Organized Religion, including Judaism, was sexism.  My second
>biggest objection is discouragement of independent thinking.
>Judaism has a much better record than Christianity in this area.
>My third objection was the outdatedness of many laws and rituals,
>and again, this applies to most of the religions I looked into.
>In this case, Judaism has it worse, because of the large number
>of specific laws that no longer apply or were written for a 
>society that no longer exists (e.g. Purity Laws, to ensure
>lots of pregnancies).

Since I have not studied atheism, I cannot respond with much
authority.  But I do not understand how objections to sexism,
authoritarianism, or ritualism imply atheism.  Responses to 
those objections have molded all branches of modern Judaism.


I asserteed:
>>(Incidentally, part of the problem may be that the set of people
>>who truly understand both atheism and Judaism is VERY VERY small;
>>furthermore, anyone who claims to know both and adopt one will be
>>rejected by the other.  
>
Maddi responded:
>I believe this number is far greater than you would like to
>think.  Just because they aren't posting in s.c.j. does not mean
>they aren't out there.  I do invite you to lurk on a.a. for a
>while; there are quite a number of lapsed Jews there.

There are enough lapsed Jews on scj, thank you. [:-)]  And I've done
enough lapsing myself.  {;-(].  



>-- 
>Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
>Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.
>
>Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553


-- 
Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions
Ashamnu, bagadnu, gazalnu ...  |   for n greater than 2.  Darn.  Can't fit
Better luck next year!         |   it into this little .sig file.  Oh well.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish