The End of Dogma: 7 Logical Steps from Blind Faith to Rational Freedom

Introduction: Skepticism and Logic in the Quest for Truth

Since the dawn of creation, a fundamental question has repeatedly stirred in the human mind: why are humans here on this earth? Is this universe the skillful handiwork of a master planner, or is it merely an epic journey of natural laws and evolution? For thousands of years, religion and theology have provided a simple solution to these questions. However, with the progress of civilization, as the light of science has reached our hands, those old beliefs have come to stand in the dock of logic.

In my previous writing, 'The Seven Tales of Faith: From Fear to the Search for Cosmic Unity,' I discussed 7 topics. However, over time, I realized that there were some theoretical gaps and limitations in logic within that writing. This blog is essentially a conscious effort on my part to remove those limitations. Out of a total of 20 strong arguments I have collected, I have presented the first 7 Columns (arguments) in this installment.

To construct these arguments, I had to step outside the bounds of my own knowledge and read countless books. In the pursuit of knowledge, I have spent day after day and passed night after night. There have been many nights when I could not sleep a wink, searching constantly for the truth. Therefore, I have a humble request to the readers: please read the writing in its entirety as a value for my hard work. If it seems that I have mentioned something entirely made up, I request that you point out those mistakes to me. Here, I wanted to pierce the wall of blind faith and open the window of rational thought. Come, let us dare to step out of traditional customs and view the universe in its true form.

 

First Column: The Complexity of Life - Design or Evolution?

A popular claim is: "This complexity of life and the order of the universe could not have created itself; there must be a skilled craftsman or designer behind it." In philosophical terms, this argument is called the 'Argument from Design.' However, in the eyes of modern science, this is an extremely weak argument.

Basis of Proof:

1. Natural Selection: When a person sees a watch or a smartphone, they know an engineer made it because inanimate objects do not evolve. But a living cell or a butterfly's wing is the result of four billion years of continuous change. Charles Darwin showed how it is possible to create extremely complex organs (like the eye) over time through tiny, incremental changes.
2. Ignorance vs. Explanation: At one time, people thought rain or lightning was the handiwork of God. Today, we know it is a physical process of the atmosphere. That is, 'I don't know how it happened' does not mean 'God did it.' This is called 'God of the Gaps.' As science advances, these 'gaps' are being filled, and the necessity of God is running out.
3. Flawed Design: If an omniscient designer had made this, there would be no flaws in the design. But there are many organs in the human body (like the appendix or the blind spot in the eye) that are imperfect and merely remnants of evolution. This provides evidence of evolution rather than a designer.

 

Second Column: Can Scripture be the Standard of Truth?

Many claim that holy books are the ultimate proof of God's existence. But this claim is a prime example of 'Circular Reasoning.' If you say, "The book is true because God wrote it, and God exists because it is written in the book," then you are actually offering no proof at all.

Basis of Proof:

1. Historical and Scientific Inconsistencies: Every scripture contains the erroneous concepts of its contemporary time. The mistakes ancient people held regarding the earth or space have found a place in these books as divine truth. If a book were truly from the Creator of the universe, it would contain no scientific errors.
2. Lack of a Standard: There are thousands of scriptures in the world. Each claims itself to be true and the others false. If there is no objective basis for proof, there is no logical reason to accept any single one as true based solely on faith.
3. Inability to Correct Mistakes: The beauty of science is that it admits mistakes and corrects itself. But scriptures claim themselves to be 'unchangeable.' Truth can never be above questioning; what is true remains true even after repeated testing.

 

Third Column: The Psychology of Miracles and Mathematical Probability

Many times in our lives, things happen that we cannot explain, and we assume them to be 'miracles.' But if we think a little deeply, it becomes apparent that miracles are actually the limitations of our knowledge and a specific illusion of the mind.

Basis of Proof:

1. Law of Probability: Among billions of people on earth, billions of events are happening every day. Mathematically, it is normal for some rare events to occur. When someone wins the lottery, we don't call it a miracle; we call it probability. The case is the same for life.
2. Survivorship Bias: When one person survives a major accident, we say God saved them. But in the same incident, where the other ninety-nine died, where was God for them? We consider it a miracle only because we hear the story of the survivor.
3. Physical Explanation vs. Miracles: Scottish philosopher David Hume said that the probability of the person lying or seeing incorrectly is far greater than the event being a miracle. That is, the probability of a natural error is always superior to a supernatural explanation.

 

Fourth Column: Morality - Is Humanity Dependent on Divine Command?

The biggest misconception is: "If there were no God, humans would not be good; society would be filled with anarchy." This concept denies human consciousness and evolution.

Basis of Proof:

1. Biological Evolution and Empathy: Humans are social animals. In primitive times, living in groups and helping one another were essential for survival. Those who helped each other survived in nature. Our morality and empathy were born from this 'mutual interest.'
2. Morality in the Animal Kingdom: Moral behavior is seen even among chimpanzees, dolphins, and wolves. They share food and care for sick companions. They did not get this education by reading any scripture. This is merely an evolutionary strategy for their survival.
3. The Superiority of Secular Morality: Morality given by religion often stands on fear (fear of hell or greed for heaven). But when a person helps another out of empathy without caring for any reward or fear, that is true morality. Today, the most developed and peaceful countries in the world (like the Scandinavian countries) primarily believe in secular ideals, which proves that God is not needed to be moral.

 

Fifth Column: Belief of the Majority - Is Popularity the Measure of Truth?

I often face a question: "If God does not exist, why do billions of people in the world believe in Him? Can so many people be wrong?" This seemingly appears to be an irrefutable argument. This is called 'Argumentum ad Populum', meaning just because many people believe in a subject, it must be true. The vastness of this number influences humans psychologically because we naturally prefer to stay with the group. But my question is: is truth ever determined by a vote? If one billion people believe something wrong, does it become true? Let us analyze this wall of popularity in the light of logic.

1. Diversity of Belief and Mutual Contradiction When people cite numbers, they forget that these numbers are not fixed on a single concept. There are currently over four thousand religions and countless deities in the world. Hinduism has the concept of millions of gods, Christianity has the Trinity, while Islam and Judaism have absolute monotheism. When I see these statistics, a major inconsistency is revealed. Every religion claims that only they are true and everyone else is wrong. If numbers are the measure of truth, whose numbers shall we accept? These mutually contradictory beliefs prove that numbers never guarantee absolute truth; they merely express the different cultural desires of humans.

2. Mistakes of the Majority in the Mirror of History. Looking at history, we see that the majority of people have been proven terribly wrong many times.

• At one time, every person in the world believed the earth was flat, but that belief could not make the earth flat.
• People believed the sun revolved around the Earth. When Galileo presented the truth against this, the belief of millions could not prove him wrong.
• People used to consider epidemics like plague or cholera as the curse of evil spirits. Today, we know that in each of these cases, the majority of people were wrong. Therefore, the belief of billions of people gives no guarantee of truth; rather, it proves that even if an idea is wrong, it is possible for it to spread socially.

3. Geography of Belief: The Lottery of Birth. I have noticed that human belief is more dependent on their birthplace than on their inquisitiveness. If born in Bangladesh, a human naturally learns to be Muslim; if in India, Hindu; in Europe, Christian; and in Israel, Jewish. Who your God will be depends on which geographical boundary you are born within. That is, this belief is not some divine light of truth, but rather a social and cultural inheritance. As Richard Dawkins or Yuval Noah Harari have shown, religious beliefs spread like viruses from one generation to another. This is called 'Cultural Conditioning.' Before finding the truth, humans cling to these beliefs while seeking their identity and security.

4. Psychological Refuge and Evolutionary Advantage: Why can't humans abandon this belief? Because behind it lies a long evolutionary history. Humans fear the unknown, and uncertainty after death terrifies them. To escape this fear, they find the shadow of a supernatural power. Uniform belief once played a major role in maintaining social cohesion. As Daniel Dennett or Christopher Hitchens argued, faith did not become popular because it is true, but because it helps humans stay in groups and find mental relief. But mental peace and objective truth are not the same thing.

5. The Invisible Unicorn and the Essence of Logic Let me give an analogy. If starting tomorrow, half the world's people begin to believe that an invisible purple unicorn created the universe and everyone follows rules out of fear of it, will that unicorn become real? Will the invisible unicorn gain the status of truth just because one billion people believe it? The answer is: no. Because belief cannot create any real entity. Truth stands only on the proof of data and logical analysis. No matter how large the number of people, not even a fraction of truth is added by it. Truth is self-sufficient.

 

Sixth Column: Is Prayer Really Effective? Or Just Mental Consolation?

From childhood, we are taught that "If you ask with all your heart, God answers prayers." Someone prays for success in exams, someone for release from an incurable disease, and someone raises their hands in hope of miraculous help during a difficult crisis in life. Often it is seen that coincidentally, that wish is fulfilled, and that is when human belief becomes firmer that God has heard their call. But as a seeker of truth, we must ask: are these events truly divine intervention, or is there a game of mere psychology and statistics hidden behind them?

1. Confirmation Bias or 'Biased Memory' The human brain is very strange. We usually remember those events that match our beliefs, and we completely forget those that do not. In scientific language, this is called 'Confirmation Bias.' When someone prays to get well and recovers, they shout, "Prayer worked." But in that same hospital, when ten other people die even after praying, we say "God's will" or "Their time had come." That is, whatever the result, we ultimately give the credit to God. This is not logic, but rather a mental trap.

2. Statistics and Probability Billions of people in the world are praying every day. Mathematically, it is very normal for some events to be positive among billions of occurrences. If you give ten job interviews and pray, and succeed in one, that is not the result of prayer; that is the result of your qualification and statistics. Billions of people have failed despite praying to stop pandemics, famines, or wars around the world. If God truly answered prayers, there would be no deaths of innocent children or terrible natural disasters in the world.

3. What Does Scientific Research Say? (The STEP Study) Many major experiments have been conducted in the history of science regarding prayer. Among them, the most notable is the 'STEP Study' (Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer) conducted by Harvard Medical School. This study, conducted on several thousand heart patients, showed that there is no significant difference in recovery rates between those for whom prayers were offered and those for whom they were not. Rather, the surprising information is that those who knew prayers were being offered for them actually saw a slight deterioration in their physical condition due to anxiety. That is, prayer cannot bring about any objective change.

4. Consolation vs. Truth I do not deny that prayer gives humans mental peace or hope. But 'hope' and 'truth' are not the same thing. Asking for help from an imaginary entity to find peace of mind can be personal tranquility, but it is impossible to change the laws of the universe or worldly events with it. Prayer is essentially just a miraculous cover to hide our inability.

 

Seventh Column: Personal Feelings - Call of the Heart or Illusion of the Brain?

Many tell me, "I feel God inside myself; I have a personal relationship with Him. So I don't need any proof." While this argument seems very deep emotionally, it is extremely dangerous because personal feelings can never be the measure of objective truth.

1. Brain Illusions and Neuroscience Our brain is incredibly powerful, but it can be easily confused. In moments of loneliness, extreme stress, or intense fear, the brain can create certain sensations that seem real to us. What we see in dreams seems real at that moment, but when we wake up, we understand it was a projection of the brain. Similarly, feeling God is actually just a specific state of our subconscious mind. "Humans feel God the most when they feel the most alone."

2. Geographic Diversity of Feelings If personal feelings were true, then the feelings of all people on earth would be the same. But what do we see? A Muslim feels Allah, a Christian Jesus, and a Hindu Krishna or Shiva. A Buddhist might not feel any God, but feels Nirvana. The question is: whose feeling is true? If everyone claims their feeling are correct, it becomes clear that these feelings are not the divine truth, but rather reflections of our innate culture and beliefs taught in childhood. Our brain feels exactly what it has been taught since childhood.

3. Feeling vs. Fact (Feeling is not a Fact) Personal experience can be true, and it can also be wrong. If someone claims they saw aliens or saw the soul of a dead person, do we accept that as true? Certainly not. Because we know personal experience can be erroneous. I believe that for something to be 'true,' it has to cross the boundaries of feeling and stand in the dock of logic and proof. You might be feeling peace, but that peace does not prove that there is a Creator of the universe. It only proves that your brain is trying to keep you calm by giving you a specific concept.

4. Human Void and the Imagination of God. Humans are naturally afraid to be alone. In this vast emptiness of the universe, we seek a 'Cosmic Father' or guardian. When we find no direction, our imagination creates a protector. While this feeling is good for psychological shelter, claiming it as scientific truth is intellectual dishonesty.

 

Conclusion: The End of God and the Liberation of Humanity

At the end of the discussion of this first part, one thing becomes clear: there is no need for any miraculous entity to understand the universe. I have tried to show that just as the complex design of life is the harvest of evolution, so too is our morality not dependent on any divine command. Overcoming the incompleteness of those 7 contexts discussed in 'The Seven Tales of Faith,' I have tried to prove in these new 7 Columns that God is essentially just a psychological refuge born from human primitive fear and the failure to explain the unknown.

However, this search for truth does not end here. In this long journey of 20 arguments, these 7 Columns were merely my beginning. I hope these arguments, brought out from my sleepless hard work and the essence of countless books, will make you think. If there is a mistake in any argument, I request you again to let me know, because I do not hesitate to accept truth based on data.

When I test God in the light of logic, He has no absolute truth. But this absence does not make life meaningless. Rather, when I realize that we have no 'Cosmic Guardian,' I learn to be even more responsible. I believe that stepping out of the imaginary circle called God, it is possible to build a new world based on logic, science, and love, where humans will work for humans without the hope of any reward.