Why I Am Not a Christian

by Bertrand Russell

He admits that it involves the loss of memory at death,

He holds that the fact of love or friendship at first sight is best accounted for as the result of love or friendship in a previous existence. “The significance of this fact has been, I think, very much underrated .... It is rarely that the writings of a philosopher or a theologian find anything in a young man’s love for his sweetheart except a mixture of sexual desire and folly, or anything in a young man’s love for his comrade except folly pure and simple” (p. 121).[1] I find it difficult to believe that the fact has any such importance as is here suggested. It would be interesting to make a statistical inquiry into cases of love at first sight, with a view to discovering how often it is determined by outward beauty, and how often by congeniality of character.

Another argument for pre-existence which is urged is, that people seem sometimes to possess by nature qualities which others only acquire by experience, and that it is natural to suppose such qualities acquired by experience in a past life. An objection which immediately occurs to one is that such qualities are not perceptible in babies.

It is surely more natural to suppose that some people learn by experience more quickly than others, than to suppose that they bring with them a wisdom which they conceal or forget until a suitable age.

There is next a chapter on free will, which produces on my mind the effect which determinist arguments always do produce: the whole thing seems irrefutable, and I cannot discover any ground for wanting more; and yet, somehow, there seems to be a problem still unsolved. I cannot state the problem; I can only say that I am not satisfied that there is no problem. The main difficulty, of course, concerns responsibility.