In Yann Martel’s fiction novel Life of Pi, Pi’s survival story includes living on a lifeboat for 227 days while accompanied by a 450 pound Bengal tiger. He claims that through his faith and prayers, Pi was able to survive on a rigorous journey in which no human has accomplished before. During the time of his struggle, Pi had been practicing four faiths, one of them including atheism. Pi’s encounters throughout his surreal story contradict the beliefs of atheists. Through the lens of an atheist, Pi fabricated his story involving Richard Parker the Bengal tiger because the events that occurred during his journey could not have happened. Atheism is known to most as a denial of theism or, a disbelief in the existence of a god. More reformed,
…show more content…
As Pi’s savagery deepens as his time at sea lengthens, he turns to god as a sense of security and hope. To bring himself comfort Pi prayed everyday, hoping that god would hear his prayers. These actions go against the ideas that atheists follow, stating that a person cannot rely on a higher being such as a god, to change one’s fate; it is up to them to change their actions (Matthew). Pi could not have possibly survived by putting his life into god’s hands, expecting that god would lead him to freedom; it is simply unrealistic. The only way that Pi could have survived his time as a castaway would be to take matters into his own hands and use his survival skills that he learned as a child. Pi also claims that he found and stayed on a carnivorous floating island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Using logic and reason, what a rationalistic atheist would use, one could recognize that an island like this cannot possibly exist. The second story Pi tells, where he is Richard Parker the tiger, is the one that is true. In the human story, Pi’s savagery of killing the cook and eating him, unfortunately shows the survival skills that Pi needed to use in order to survive. Here, Pi took charge of the situation, and by using his previous knowledge of the sea, and survival tactics, he was able to live the rest of his life on land. Pi also states that no one will …show more content…
Through the lens of an atheist, only one is proven true, whereas the other is not. The first version, the one which Pi prefers, demonstrates how his survival is due to his prayers to god and religion. He is accompanied by a Bengal tiger who gives Pi the will to survive. The other version, tells a story of savagery and cannibalism between a group of people lost at sea in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Pi’s survival in this version is due to his skills and ability to use resources around him to his benefit. The first story was contrived by Pi so that he could live on with his life, because that story does not involve the violence and animalistic behaviors that the real version includes. A message of atheism states that one cannot depend on a higher being to change one’s situation, he must take the initiative to do it himself. It is impossible that Pi could have survived the traumatic experiences he encountered through praying to god. Through laws of reason and logic, Pi could not have lived through 227 days as a castaway merely through his prayers and total dependency on god, whom cannot even be proven real and therefore, the story that includes Richard Parker the tiger cannot be
As Pi’s savagery deepens as his time at sea lengthens, he turns to god as a sense of security and hope. To bring himself comfort Pi prayed everyday, hoping that god would hear his prayers. These actions go against the ideas that atheists follow, stating that a person cannot rely on a higher being such as a god, to change one’s fate; it is up to them to change their actions (Matthew). Pi could not have possibly survived by putting his life into god’s hands, expecting that god would lead him to freedom; it is simply unrealistic. The only way that Pi could have survived his time as a castaway would be to take matters into his own hands and use his survival skills that he learned as a child. Pi also claims that he found and stayed on a carnivorous floating island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Using logic and reason, what a rationalistic atheist would use, one could recognize that an island like this cannot possibly exist. The second story Pi tells, where he is Richard Parker the tiger, is the one that is true. In the human story, Pi’s savagery of killing the cook and eating him, unfortunately shows the survival skills that Pi needed to use in order to survive. Here, Pi took charge of the situation, and by using his previous knowledge of the sea, and survival tactics, he was able to live the rest of his life on land. Pi also states that no one will …show more content…
Through the lens of an atheist, only one is proven true, whereas the other is not. The first version, the one which Pi prefers, demonstrates how his survival is due to his prayers to god and religion. He is accompanied by a Bengal tiger who gives Pi the will to survive. The other version, tells a story of savagery and cannibalism between a group of people lost at sea in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Pi’s survival in this version is due to his skills and ability to use resources around him to his benefit. The first story was contrived by Pi so that he could live on with his life, because that story does not involve the violence and animalistic behaviors that the real version includes. A message of atheism states that one cannot depend on a higher being to change one’s situation, he must take the initiative to do it himself. It is impossible that Pi could have survived the traumatic experiences he encountered through praying to god. Through laws of reason and logic, Pi could not have lived through 227 days as a castaway merely through his prayers and total dependency on god, whom cannot even be proven real and therefore, the story that includes Richard Parker the tiger cannot be