Quote of the day

July 25, 2013 • 7:05 am

From someone we should all read more of: Robert G. Ingersoll, the Great Agnostic.

This is from The Gods and Other Lectures (1876), and is the best mission statement I know for atheists, both old a new:

Notwithstanding the fact that infidels in all ages have battled for the rights of man, and have at all times been the fearless advocates of liberty and justice, we are constantly charged by the church with tearing down without building again. The church should by this time know that it is utterly impossible to rob men of their opinions. The history of religious persecution fully establishes the fact that the mind necessarily resists and defies every attempt to control it by violence. The mind necessarily clings to old ideas until prepared for the new. The moment we comprehend the truth, all erroneous ideas are of necessity cast aside.

A surgeon once called upon a poor cripple and kindly offered to render him any assistance in his power. The surgeon began to discourse very learnedly upon the nature and origin of disease; of the curative properties of certain medicines; of the advantages of exercise, air and light, and of the various ways in which health and strength could be restored. These remarks ware so full of good sense, and discovered so much profound thought and accurate knowledge, that the cripple, becoming thoroughly alarmed, cried out, “Do not, I pray you, take away my crutches. They are my only support, and without them I should be miserable indeed!” “I am not going,” said the surgeon, “to take away your crutches. I am going to cure you, and then you will throw the crutches away yourself.”

For the vagaries of the clouds the infidels propose to substitute the realities of earth; for superstition, the splendid demonstrations and achievements of science; and for theological tyranny, the chainless liberty of thought.

41 thoughts on “Quote of the day”

  1. I am often humbled by this man who figured out more than 100 years ago so much of what I thought I was so clever to have figured out for myself a few decades ago, and much more.

    That crutches analogy needs to be the stock answer to accommodationists that claim religion needs replacing by all the strident atheists tearing it down. It is absolutely brilliant.

  2. The religious accusations to the non believers never seem to change. They are still accusing us of wrecking society even almost 140 years later! Interesting that the “you don’t put anything in religion’s place” was trotted out even then. I guess, plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!

    1. You do realize you’re only off by a factor of about 20, at the very least?

      Just look at the reaction Epicurus got….

      b&

    1. The only difference between old atheism and new atheism is numbers. That and the fact that you won’t get burned on the stake for defending your atheism anymore. Or at least not in our neck of the woods.

      The more scientific discoveries, the more atheists.

    2. That claim is indeed ludicrous. Mencken is also an excellent example of how wrong that claim is. And, as Ben pointed out above, you can go back just about as far as there are decent records and find clear examples of skeptics speaking directly and irreverently about religions.

    1. I enjoyed it. It’s a good summary of his life and an examination of his effect on the freethought movement and why he is less remembered today than he should be.

      1. I live in a town where books like this usually quickly end up in the bargain bin, but I haven’t found it in any yet for some reason. Maybe the local book stores deemed the book was too offensive to stock at all.

        In any case this post, and your comment, have pushed me over the edge. I’m tired of waiting and have just paid regular price, to Amazon, for the book.

        1. Good for you. That is money well spent, but I find his books at the public or university library and always feel cheated when I have to give them back.

          You are lucky to have a copy to keep.

  5. According to Susan Jacoby’s Freethinkers, Ingersoll was America’s most popular public speaker during the late 19th Century. And he (along with many secularists) was thoroughly engaged in the social justice issues of the day. Now, he’s hardly remembered, and the secular voices who contributed to the ending of slavery or the rights of women are routinely overlooked in popular histories. That’s a shame. I look forward to reading her new biography, too!

  9. For those looking for the writings from the horse’s mouth, so to speak… the “Library Genesis” link for “The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll” (8Mb PDF) is messed up, and downloads tables of data in what is either Russian or Ukrainian. So don’t bother with the only library-genesis.com link there.

    The works do seem to be available, in two volumes, at http://archive.org/details/gen-lib though (16.5Mb each). (also can be read online without downloading)

    Amazing how I can turn to a random page and see arguments the “new atheists” have made, practically word for word. This is what happens when the arguments are the same, and the style is so crystal clear. It’s like convergent evolution. 🙂

    1. Vol I, pp261-2

      “It seems almost impossible for religious people to really grasp the idea of intellectual freedom. They seem to think that man is responsible for his honest thoughts; that unbelief is a crime; that investigation is sinful; that credulity is a virtue, and that reason is a dangerous guide. They cannot
      divest themselves of the idea that in the realm of thought there must be government—authority and obedience—laws and penalties—rewards and punishments, and that somewhere in the universe there is a penitentiary for the soul.”

      Where have we heard that before?

      1. Your comment sets off alarm bells in my head.

        checks and balances…checks and balances…checks and balances…

        That’s what I am hearing right now with my inside voice.

        Religion has no check on it power structure because the authority is outside the reach of ‘us’.

        I don’t know of any possible way for a free mind to flourish if that free mind is not able to express itself.

        Comment if you know different, but the believers trump card is typically “I believe cause God said so.”

        The atheist trump card is, “I challenge what you believe because I have evidence that is contrary to what you tell me God said.”

        I just want anyone and everyone to know, that for me, checks and balances is the only way. Even, Pascal’s Wager, if I am wrong, at least my voice challenges the majority who without a strong opposition might be inclined to murder people who challenge them. (History)

  11. I love this quote, especially the paragraph about the crutches. It can be quoted by itself and without explicit reference to religion or atheism, fly under the radar so to speak to sneak in subersive ideas into religious minds.

  12. Those who profess to believe in heavenly salvation followed by eternal happiness betray their own self-deception when they cry at funerals.

    1. Why?

      The loss is still real and they have to live with that loss the rest of their(earthly) lives.

      1. Yeah, it would be better to say they betray themselves by wanting to live. If you seriously believed in heavenly salvation why live in this second rate place called earth?

        1. That would make more sense philosophically speaking, although I think you’re not supposed to commit suicide biblically speaking( I don’t speak bible fluently so please correct me if I’m wrong ).

          Telling anyone that they should consider that option is bad form. 🙂

          1. I don’t speak bible fluently either, but Arthur Schopenhauer tells me that the Bible doesn’t have an opinion on suicide.

            Pre-bible days, who knows. Post written record, we know of many amazing, influential people dying by suicide rather than ‘natural causes.’

            Schopenhauer is one, but even he refers back to the most logically sound position which is Hume when he discusses suicide.

            For me, because I have studied the various philosophical and theological opinions on the subject, and considered the act myself, I find suicide a viable option under the proper circumstance.

            So does the health care industry of the U.S. When my mom was suffering to the point that she stopped speaking. She would squeeze my hand, but she wouldn’t speak to me. I looked her in the eyes and said ‘Talk’. She said nothing.

            But, she squeezed back. Being very close to her as I was, (Momma’s boy) I think I knew what she was thinking. I think she knew what I was thinking.

            I have a dad, a brother and half-sister that connects me to that My Mom.

            She would never kill herself, but, if she is going to die in a few days and suffer every minute of each of those days, only to die, shouldn’t we consider the idea that suicide is okay.

            Shouldn’t we recognize that there are worse things than living.

            If you live well, Good for you.
            If your life sucks, okay, maybe you should kill yourself.

            Ultimately its a thought problem. Can you make living have value. Can you live happy at least part of the time.

            If not. Kill Yourself.

            Mom died two days early because I convinced my dad, brother, and other that we don’t have a right to make her suffer. I am fine with that.

            I miss her, I love her, and I would not be me without her.

          1. Well, I’m not because I don’t espouse that value but William Lane Craig does because he’s at least being consistent.

          3. Ha – no I knew you said it tongue in cheek. I just had to add my smartassness to it. 🙂

      2. Would they also be heartbroken to hear their loved one won an all-expenses-paid vacation to a tropical paradise? After all, the “loss” of death is just as temporary, until they rejoin them, right?

        Heck, why not decide to join them happily in paradise right now?

        1. Why do you get sad when a loved one dies?

          After all, that person isn’t feeling any pain or sadness anymore.

          2. It’s tempting to agree with him and I can’t help laughing, but out in the real world I wouldn’t say that to another person.

          3. I couldn’t say for absolutely sure… but speaking from secondhand knowledge of Stanhope as a FoF, I don’t think he would say that to another person in the real world, either. Such is the beauty of standup comedy. You get to adopt a completely over-the-top persona and express commonsense notions in the most outrageous manner possible. 🙂

  13. I just listened (yesterday) to David Brooks (NY Times) speaking on morals.

    He’s quite religious and trots out the trope that you can’t have a moral life without the “standards” religion provides (while in almost the same breath saying, “I don’t think religious people are better than atheists .. the data don’t support that.”

    He said the Jews followed rules (outside in) to attain moral virtue and Christians used love (inside out) to attain moral virtue.

    Yeah, baby, that Hell is really all about love isn’t it?!

    George Carlin

  14. Coincidentally I just read this earlier this week (!), as I was reading The Gods.
    I highlighted this section (and plenty of others).

    Ingersoll was well ahead of his time but as already said above it is downright depressing to hear religionists still trot out the same arguments that he rebutted nearly 150 years ago. Well same as with the arguments against evolution really. I suppose religion is really only comfortable living in the past.

    1. Can I do Nietzsche here?

      He claimed, that the majority can overtake the minority. His study of history lead him to the conclusion that Church leaders used the ‘power of the people’ to promote their agenda.

      Power in numbers.

      If we promote a suffering class of humans, then that suffering class will outnumber the group that tries to better themselves.

      Nietzsche talk, Climb the mountain that is your struggle and you will find peace. Or, a big fat ‘OR’, you drop to your knees and subjugate yourself to tyranny.

      The point, I thing, is that making the most of you life alone is more satisfying then begging for help, praying for assistance, and expecting that the world revolves around you.

      Just my thought on Ingersoll and Frank. I call him Frank because we are close like that.

Comments are closed.