Earlier today, I visited Westminister Abbey for the first time. It's an interesting place, and despite the fairly steep (10 pound) admissions charge, well worth the visit. It takes a while just to walk through, and on the way you go past some truly remarkable bits of history. Right near the end of my visit, I found myself standing in front of a very plain, white marble tombstone. Unlike many of the stones there, this one was very simple. Just a name - Charles Robert Darwin - a date of birth, and a date of death. Nothing more - no record of the accomplishments that gained him the honor of a burial in Westminister, no glowing list of tributes, nothing. That's fine, though. Somehow I doubt that there are too many people who really need to be told who he was, and the simple tribute seems quite fitting.
Standing there, thinking about the man and his accomplishments, I was suddenly struck by a strange thought. What, standing in a church at the grave of someone you respected a great deal, is an agnostic to do?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Just what you did - it's what I did. Look at the place where he lies now, remember what he did for us, resolve to tell others about him. Keep his name, his memory, and his work alive. Be glad he was with us once.
Revering the dead is not something one needs to believe in an afterlife to do. What came before us is what sets the scene for our own lives, and the good of the past is worth respect.
Nothing about what a religious person would do is particularly religious, though. Being grateful for or impressed by what someone who is now dead did in their life is hardly saying that there's an after-life or something.
I posted a photograph of Darwin's stone in case anyone is interested.
I don't know what agnostics are supposed to do but I can tell you that two atheists were feeling very quiet and humble.
The same (adjusted to the role and occasion) as an atheist does when required to compose a eulogy for an agnostic (which I've now done twice) -- humbly contemplate the life and legacy of the departed; be glad that you shared the human story with them.
I'm an agnostic and a huge Darwin fan - he was a devoted dad and husband, as well as a great scientist. I went to Westminster just to see his stone. I knelt down and said a few words to him, though I know that makes no sense. Like Larry Moran I took a photo of it even though you aren't supposed to do so in that room.
I've read a number of biographies of him, including Janet Browne's two volume one, and he is one of the few historic figures who I wish desperately I could meet and speak with. Reading about Darwin sparked a general interest for me in science history, and particularly the 19th century.
I think that the best an agnostic, atheist or any person who doesn't believe in prayer or an afterlife can do is to remember the man, as truly as they can.
The idea of Orson Scott Cards Speaker for the Dead really appeals to me. I read those books at a very formative point in my life, philosophically speaking, and certain points rang very true. In particular was the idea that to love someone is to truly know them. I also believe that the greatest honour you can grant someone is to hold a true and honest memory of them. Not an image or caricature of what you wanted them to be like, but an honest analysis of who they were and what they did. To sugar coat or dismiss the dead is to do them the greatest dishonour you can.
So if you want to show someone the greatest honour you can, you get to know them. Understand them till you can say that you love them.
I would look at the grave, remember the man, what he did to us, and wonder if karma would send him back as a monkey.
Phhht! Darwin: Loser!