In a past religious studies course, my instructor discussed with the class that certain anthropologists believe that a genesis for establishing religion occurred when our ancestors confronted the biological inevitability of death. The mysterious phenomenon undoubtedly conjured many emotions: fear, curiosity, sadness, among many others.

But perhaps the most important emotion (at least with relation to the eventual anthropomorphic creation of religiosity) was that of uncertainty. Without scientific evidence the human mind was presented with the phenomenon of death; something that could not be explained and organized by the human brain.

Our minds are in a perpetual state to make sense of, and organize, what we experience through the various senses and our own emotional state(s). Our languages, which are the most important ways through which we interact with one another, are based upon organization, and represent how the organizational process works. We distinguish animals from humans, and certain species of animals from other species, naming them accordingly. In categorizing what we see, we coordinate and organize our experience. Without this simple organization our minds would be in perpetual chaos.

It is precisely this concept that would have affected those, and many today, who are confronted with the idea of death. How does the mind make sense of what it cannot explain? How do we address death?

This is one of, perhaps the most important, foundations of human religiosity: a filing in of the blanks, so to speak. Many individuals who are unsure as to what happens when our bodies expire (as we all are) will choose to “fill in the blanks” by establishing a specific, perhaps even detailed, account of what they are “sure” will happen when death overcomes us.

For some, it may include a pearly gate, a god with a long dapper-white beard and a James Earl Jones voice. Others may believe that once death overtakes our consciousness, we cease to exist entirely, as if a light switch has been flipped to the “down” position.

Why is uncertainty not a more commonly argued stance? Have we forgotten the old explanations of our antecedents? In more primitive years, it was thought that stars were tiny windows looking into Heaven. That rain was poured upon from some celestial damn. We now know that stars are not windows, but giant consolidations of gas. Rain does not come from the heavens, but from clouds, products of the Earth’s atmosphere. As with the phenomenon of death, individuals attempted to create a reality when actual, true reality was lacking.

Isn’t it far wiser to admit one’s intellectual limitations? Isn’t it better to answer the question, “What happens when we die?” with a confident “I don’t know” than with some fantastic and delusional journey involving, but not limited to, virgins, a gaudy rapture, pearly gates, or reincarnation?

Doubt should be welcomed, for it allows individuals to debate, think, and reason with whatever force that compels such doubt in the first place. Doubt begets thought. Thought begets intellectual growth, which in turn begets human development. Uncertainty is an acceptable outcome. Despite offering no firm conclusions, it acknowledges the limitations of our understanding and perception regarding death. Let us go forth and be confident with our uncertainty.

It is far wiser and salubrious than fantasy.

Tweet  Print This Post

Tags: religion & philosophy // Add Comment »