The Sun Also Rises On His Overstatements?!

The gospel according to Ernest Hemingway:

“All thinking men are atheists.”

There are many who would not only think to disagree, but would go toe to toe with Mr. Ernest. The debate would be thought-provoking. All one would have to do to dispel the merit of this statement is to listen to several debates from different people on both sides of the fence to realize that thoughtfulness abounds irrespective of the picket fence. Certainly you would find fools on both sides, as well as a spectrum of aptitude in between. Let us not forget of those people who are indecisively but thoughtfully perched on the fence.

Are all thinking men atheists?

How bold does one have to be to say such a thing? How vapid of thought does an author have to be to write such a thought down? One only has to find a single thinking man who is not an atheist to refute such a statement. The danger of all-exclusive statements is that only one exception will reveal its feebleness.

If this statement were true, then we can conclude at least this one thing:

“All thinking men [and Mr. Ernest Hemingway] are atheists.”

This quote was also recorded on the back of this book that was immaculately conceived by Joan Konner and was surrounded by these words:

“‘All thinking men are atheists,’ Ernest Hemingway famously wrote. True? Here are quips, quotes, and questions from a distinguished assortment of geniuses and jokers, giving readers a chance to decide for themselves….”

This was followed by quotes from the likes of Wilde, Bierce, Stein, Nietzche, Ertz, Lee, Emerson, and Shaw. Quite tellingly, this collection of thoughts are almost in their entirety being voiced by people on one side of the fence. It seems that the opportunity of “giving readers a chance to decide for themselves” is a wee-bit disingenuous. Is this not a classic example of stacking the deck?!

Perhaps Mr. Ernest’s statement ought to be modified once more:

“All thinking men [and Mr. Ernest along with Mrs. Joan] are atheists.”

If true, then can it be said to be true?

The gospel according to Joan Konner:

“The reason there are so many opinions is that no one knows the Truth.”

Is this one of those “truths” that you have to have an opinion on?

By this I must point out that this is somewhat of a self-refuting or self-defeating statement. Since no one knows the truth, then how can a true statement be made on anything. Either this statement is true which means that we really can’t know if it is indeed true, or this statement is false which means that its irrelevant.

If true, then it refutes and defeats itself.

If not true, then it doesn’t matter.

If no one knows the truth, then by what reason or reasons can a statement of this nature be made? Do you follow? Is this not a reasonable and rational response to the claim being made? How can a thought that claims that truth can not be known be considered a truth?

This statement is quite dogmatic in its expression of relativism.

Interestingly enough, the very fact that there are so many opinions would prove this statement inaccurate. Please allow me to explain. People have opinions and share such opinions on account of thinking them to be true. They consider their opinion to be a valid and better reflection of whatever they happen to be thinking about. They believe their opinion to be more accurate than another opinion that stands in opposition.

This quote is thought to be true by the one who pressed the letters that communicated the opinion regarding Truth.

It is thought to be true.

It isn’t.

With all that said, I must say that this thought does reveal at least the following notions:

If Truth were accessible, then it would be challenging to understand and even more so to communicate. If Reason were able to distinguish between truth and fiction, logic and illogic, accurate and inaccurate reflections of reality, then it would also be a challenge. But a challenge well worth the effort as some sense of reality comes into view.

If these ideas are not true, then what isn’t self-refuting and self-defeating?