Interview conducted February 10, 2004

Interviewer: Good Morning Mr. Yeldell. Glad to have you.

Jason Yeldell: Glad to be here!

Interviewer: My first question is, what was your motivation and reason for writing "A Call To Sanity"?

Jason Yeldell: It is actually quite interesting. "A Call To Sanity" was never actually intended to be a published book available worldwide. What everyone now knows as "A Call To Sanity" actually started out in 2001 as a bunch of loose sheets of paper with my sloppy handwritten text for the purpose of explaining what rational atheism and it's tenets are to a loved one who at the time did not understand the mindset of someone who is an "Atheist". I wanted this individual to fully know and understand what Rational Atheism was and why exactly the Rational Atheist does not believe in a God or supernatural realm. As time went on, my writings automatically started taking on the look of a "manuscript" as it increased in size and content and topics turned into "chapters". It was then that publishing was seriously considered.

Interviewer: I know this is a question that many may have, so I will play "Devil's Advocate" and ask it.

Jason Yeldell: Hahaha, sure, no problem, ask away....nice pun by the way!

Interviewer: This may be addressed in your book, but the question is, "If someone is an Atheist, meaning they don't believe in a God or Supernatural Realm, how do they have a sense of morality or right from wrong?"

Jason Yeldell: This is a great question that I am sure many have. It is indeed addressed in the book, but of course I will answer. These types of questions may seem very simple, but in actuality their explainations are quite involved and require alot of prerequisite info about rational atheism. But, to answer you in a nutshell, the rational atheist understands that what we humans define as a "value system" based on morals, is really nothing but feelings about actions, thoughts and behaviors that are tied into our evolutionary history as a species, but explained culturally. Meaning that, what we humans identify as "morality" is simply an aid to the survival and reproduction of our species! Throughout the course of human evolution, certain thoughts, actions and behaviors were found to not be socially advantageous and so in turn over time have become ingrained as taboo or "immoral" For example, the act of stealing from a fellow member is not "socially advantageous" for the species because it possibly made family units weaker and susceptible to predation. Similarly, what we would call "philanthropy" or "helping fellow humans" is socialy advantageous because it streghthens bonds between individuals and ultimately strengthens a social group on a whole. Thus, being cooperative and helping out fellow man over time has yielded more benefit than detriment and thus became seen as what we would call "good", "right" or "moral". Basically, morality has nothing to do with a supernatural realm or "God", one can be what we consider "moral" irrespective of their philosophical views on life!

Interviewer: When did you realize that you were a Rational Atheist?

Jason Yeldell: Well I do not know exactly when it "struck me". But since a young child I was always fascinated with nature and the world's creatures. When one has a sincere fascination and affinity towards nature and natural history, they automatically more times than not develop into individuals who champion common sense, logic and accurate depictions of the true reality of the world we live on. This affinity to nature, science, "common sense" and logic was a staple in my life all through childhood. With common sense and logic, comes the realization that it is always beneficial to objectively examine evidence before making a decision. Such as the decision to accept belief in a supernatural realm. Life is all about choices and decisions. The more one learns about the world we live in, the better their decision making skills become. This explains the affinity that the rational atheist normally has with logic and science.

Interviewer: I know that Rational Atheism relies heavily on the biological principals of Evolution. Many would say that we do not know what exactly happened on this planet many many years ago, so isn't the belief in Evolution simply a "leap of faith" on the Atheist's and scientist's part? Just like how those who believe in a God take a leap of faith and believe in "him"?

Jason Yeldell: Excellent Question! I will answer it like this....

what the rational atheist would say here is that although nobody knows exactly what happened, we do have a pretty good idea and consensus of what happened based on the evidence. And that evidence does indeed show that evolution did indeed occur and is still occurring on this planet. It is not a leap of faith on the rational atheist's part to understand and accept evolution. Evolution has been verified and is seen in every aspect of living creatures today from the whale's fin to the bacterial flagella. Acknowledging the biological facts of evolution require no "leap of faith". The rational atheist would say that the "true leap of faith" involves choosing not to recognize the evidence(s) of evolution and seeing them as unfathomable and believing in an unverifiable supernatural creator.

Interviewer: Mr. Yeldell, what would you say to those who argue that evolution may have occured, but science does not offer any evidence to state how exactly life began on this very planet! Religion does have an answer to this question!

Jason Yeldell: What I would say is that they are indeed correct that science and rational thought does not know concretely how life came to be, (although there are some good ideas and plausible theories). But nonetheless, this lack of knowledge once again, does not give credence to a supernatural realm simply because they have a way around this problem! Anyone can make up an answer to an unanswered phenomenon willy nilly, but the test is whether that alternative view stands up to consistent logic. The concept of Creation by a "god" does not stand up to logical scrutiny! For example, if we never knew what the answer to 2 + 2 was, and I propose that the answer is "17", should this answer be taken seriously without any logic and mechanism to back it up nor a way to test its validity? Of course not?..One of the fundamentals of rational thought is that you can not base an argument or claim on a lack of knowledge. Simply because science does not have answer to how exactly life began on Earth, this is no way translates into, "God must of did it".

Interviewer: Is there anyway that others can get in contact with you regarding your book, further interviews or appearances?

Jason Yeldell: Sure, I can be reached through email at jasonyeldell@acalltosanity.com I also invite all (theists and atheists alike) to participate in my ongoing online debate forum regarding the book and it's topics at www.acalltosanity.com/phpbb2

Interviewer: Thank you for this excellent interview!

Jason Yeldell: No, Thank You !