Plato’s “Simile of the Cave” in The Republic  describes the extent to which philosophy frees an individual from blindness to the true nature of reality. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69F7GhASOdM)

Literary analysts have reached this consensus of understanding based analyses of texts the author wrote before and after, among other factors. When taken out of context, the intended message of the piece becomes ambiguous. Therefore, a multitude of possible interpretations can be derived from it. One such interpretation was once used against me in a debate over the existence of the Christian God, and still troubles me to no end.

Other than the claims of Christian Bible, which in and of itself is a collection of first and secondhand anecdotes, there is currently no conclusive evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. If there were, the debate in question would not exist. This is problematic for Theologians who, I find, must resort to logical gymnastics in order to make their ideas palatable. Christian Fundamentalists take this a step further and glorify belief in the absence of evidence as faith, as if the rejection of logic were somehow a virtue.

As an atheist, I am convinced that the current interdisciplinary body of human knowledge almost positively contradicts the possibility of such an event. I also believe in the existence of objective truth, and that objective truth should never depend on faith. A pastor need not preach to his congregation that rattlesnakes are venomous. If any member of his flock dismisses the findings of modern biology (which are largely based on observation), then they are free to walk barefoot in the desert and test the theory themselves—with immediate results.

If a philosophy is to be believed in earnest, and policies to be obeyed without further question, then the foundation on which they stand must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Extraordinary claims and extraordinary demands require extraordinary evidence. The rest is just a suggestion.

I believe the philosophies laid down in Plato’s “Simile of the Cave” dispute the value of sensory and empirical evidence in the observable world. A person who has been coerced to doubt their own senses can be endlessly manipulated, often to suit subversive agendas—for the profit of one or more beneficiaries. The danger lies not in blind faith itself, but in what you can be convinced to do because of it.

A good friend of mine attends Mass every Sunday from 8AM to 9AM. That adds to 52 hours a year, which over the course of his life will amount to 41,60 hours, or about 173 days straight—not including special occasions. On principle, he has chosen to teach at private Catholic Schools, where he earns half as much per year as he would at public institutions. He tithes 10% of his modest income to the Church as required, which amounts to several thousand dollars a year, and which is put to uses he is unaware of. He even abstains from premarital sex as much as he can stand and suffers from severe pangs of guilt when he fails.

For his faith, he is willing to surrender what I deem is a staggering degree of his autonomy (and self-interest) as an individual with free will. In honor of a divine entity he may never see or hear, he is willing to follow a fixed set of commands and make costly sacrifices. I am sure the Catholic Church thoroughly enjoys his contributions. It always reminds me of what is perhaps the most famous line from George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984:

 

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

 

Plato. Plato’s The Republic. New York: Books, Inc., 1943. Print.

 

Orwell, George. 1984. London: Secker and Warburg, 1949. Print.