Notable Atheist: David Cronenberg

From an interview in Film Threat, February 1997.

Q: Most of your films deal with various characters’ personal spirituality, yet you have never dealt directly with religion.

A: The reason why is that I’m not interested. You’re absolutely right. For me, it’s not even worth discussion. It doesn’t interest me. It interests me only to be discarded. If I start there, I’m mired in a discussion that is very unfruitful to me. I’m simply a non-believer and have been forever. To discuss religion is to put me in a debate with myself. I’m interested in saying, “Let us discuss the existential question. We are all going to die, that is the end of all consciousness. There is no afterlife. There is no God. Now what do we do.” That’s the point where it starts getting interesting to me. If I have to go back and say, “What if there is a God?” then I’m doing a debate that is not very interesting. You have to create one character who believes and another that doesn’t. It’s not an issue.

Tagged , , , , , ,

3 thoughts on “Notable Atheist: David Cronenberg

  1. Chris Lim says:

    Stalin, Mao and the others didn’t kill in the name of Atheism, they just killed. There’s no guidelines to Atheism. Atheism is just the simple belief that there’s no god. Everything else is based on an individual’s belief system. Religious murders on the other hand, is based on guidelines, i.e. those found in the Bible or the Quran. These “guidelines” are brainwashed into children at a very young age, it affects the system at every level. The childish assumption that these books are holy, lends authority to the words written down in them. Many Christians and Muslims believe homosexuality is wrong, simply because their religious book said so. That whole premise, the callous abuse of what’s right and what’s wrong, is dangerous to modern society.

    You speak about murderous dictators, but what about someone like Osama bin laden? Many Muslims claim that he’s a martyr, one which will be blessed prosperously in heaven. This issue isn’t about evil, it’s about the simple fact that religion claims certainty and divinity, for many principles that are so blatantly fallacious, negatively influencing the world we live in. Religion is part of the evil you see. Religion is the homophobia in Africa, religion is the misogyny in Asia, religion is the rape in the Middle East, religion is the hypocrisy in America.

    Your question on what’s right/wrong isn’t so much a religious/atheist question, it’s more of a humanistic question. But my short answer to that is we need social morality to maintain order. Common sense, when viewed from a social perspective, should dictate that no human has the right to harm another human without just cause. If an individual is convinced that he/she can violently rape or abuse another human being, a weaker human being, then we have failed as a society, as an entity, to protect the weak.

  2. Gideon says:

    Also, another question: do we decide what is good and what is not good/right and wrong for humanity? For example: murder, rape, theft. The ones affected would say that it was wrong, but if you were the perpetrator and believed that what you have done wasn’t right or wrong, but just your decision regardless of views from others, then should you be penalized?

  3. Gideon says:

    Answer me this: Christians killed many Jews in the name of Jesus while famed anti-religious leaders like Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung and the Kims killed many in the name of their political parties, which were based on atheist and anti-theist views thanks to another atheist, Karl Marx. Same results, but with different reasons that caused them. In a theist’s view both sides will go (and went) to Hell because they broke God’s commandment. However, in an atheist state of mind, since we throw the belief of naked Santa Claus and his winged girlfriends greeting us the moment after we die to the boiler, they’re nothing more than pile of bones amongst rusty swords and guns killing for false causes. No afterlife for either scenario, which brings me to the point: If we’re finite and only live once and (want to) live our lives to the max, and not allow to have our rights to live as we want removed, then surely Superman shouldn’t thwart Lex Luthor’s attempts to dominate humanity and start killing off people in Metropolis, right?

    It may sound stupid, and probably will be labeled as one (this would not be the first time), but this requires rational thinking and analyzing rather than an antireligious one.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: