7 ms·

How do you "experiment" with atheism? Just saying to yourself "I'm now an atheist" and seeing how that feels? It doesn't sound like you ever had solid rational

How do you "experiment" with atheism? Just saying to yourself "I'm now an atheist" and seeing how that feels? It doesn't sound like you ever had solid rational and empirical reasons for choosing atheism, and indeed that is the only kind of atheist that I've ever heard of turning to the supernatural. Atheists like me are atheists not because the quality of life it provides, but because there's no empirical evidence that there's any truth to any of the supernatural claims ever made. We understand that faith is a choice of last resort when no other evidence is available, and that faith is a really bad way to come to conclusions. Atheists like me understand our inherent biases, we seek to ask questions in a way that there can be a negative answer. There is no such negating answer to "what would convince me there is no god" and that alone, in the absence of any kind of empirical evidence for the existence of a supernatural entity, should be enough to not be a believer. The truth is whatever the truth is, and I want to believe reality no matter how it makes me feel. If it feels good to believe in magical things that care about us but those magical things aren't real then I don't want to believe in them. The litany of Tarski is useful: If the box contains a diamond, I desire to believe that the box contains a diamond; If the box does not contain a diamond, I desire to believe that the box does not contain a diamond; Let me not become attached to beliefs I may not want.

sdegutis 13y ago
By "experiment" I mean I started questioning whether or not it was true, debating with my peers about it (either for or against). I ultimately settled on agnosticism because absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there was a God who chose to never reveal (or even hint at) his existence to humanity, it would be incorrect for a person to be an atheist. Since that's a legitimate possibility, it makes more sense to be agnostic than atheist.
- belluchan 13y ago
  So what evidence did you eventually find to turn to God if it's not a feelings/faith based thing?
  - sdegutis 13y ago
    If it could be explained in a HN comment, I think there would be many more Christians in the world. That's why there are whole books written on the subject. The only one I still own is The Handbook of Christian Apologetics[1][2] so that's the only one I can recommend. But it does require some faith, just not blind or unreasoning faith, as most people seem to think. [1]: http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Christian-Apologetics-Peter-Kreeft/dp/0830817743 http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Christian-Apologetics-Peter-K...
    - nbouscal 13y ago
      There's no other kind of faith. Faith literally means "belief without evidence."
      - sdegutis 13y ago
        That's not my definition of faith. But let's not get hung up on semantics and disagreements about definitions. The point I was making is that there is a good deal of evidence, but it also requires a little belief in something that you can't absolutely prove.
        nbouscal 13y ago
        I don't want to debate with you; I've done more than my share of religious debates in my life and no longer find any joy in them. I also completely agree that debating definitions is rarely useful. I will point out, though, that nobody claims to have faith that the Earth revolves around the Sun, or that the sky is blue. "Faith" connotes a leap; I understand that as a leap from the evidence to the conclusion, covering a gap that cannot be covered by logical reasoning. It's that leap that I take issue with, regardless of which word you choose to label it with. You've repeatedly recommended a book of apologetics throughout the thread. If I could make a recommendation in turn: Critique of Religion and Philosophy, by Walter Kaufmann. I think it can give you much to think about, and from a reasonably friendly perspective.
  - belluchan 13y ago
sdegutis 13y ago
I should also point out that, after my initial conversion to Christianity, "how I feel about it" is basically not a factor in what I believe. There are many times when I felt miserable and strongly wished I wasn't a Christian anymore. But I couldn't just choose to disbelieve in something that my research had convinced me was objectively true.

sdegutis 13y ago

By "experiment" I mean I started questioning whether or not it was true, debating with my peers about it (either for or against). I ultimately settled on agnosticism because absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there was a God who chose to never reveal (or even hint at) his existence to humanity, it would be incorrect for a person to be an atheist. Since that's a legitimate possibility, it makes more sense to be agnostic than atheist.

belluchan 13y ago
So what evidence did you eventually find to turn to God if it's not a feelings/faith based thing?
- sdegutis 13y ago
  If it could be explained in a HN comment, I think there would be many more Christians in the world. That's why there are whole books written on the subject. The only one I still own is The Handbook of Christian Apologetics[1][2] so that's the only one I can recommend. But it does require some faith, just not blind or unreasoning faith, as most people seem to think. [1]: http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Christian-Apologetics-Peter-Kreeft/dp/0830817743 http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Christian-Apologetics-Peter-K...
  - nbouscal 13y ago
    There's no other kind of faith. Faith literally means "belief without evidence."
    - sdegutis 13y ago
      That's not my definition of faith. But let's not get hung up on semantics and disagreements about definitions. The point I was making is that there is a good deal of evidence, but it also requires a little belief in something that you can't absolutely prove.
      - nbouscal 13y ago
        I don't want to debate with you; I've done more than my share of religious debates in my life and no longer find any joy in them. I also completely agree that debating definitions is rarely useful. I will point out, though, that nobody claims to have faith that the Earth revolves around the Sun, or that the sky is blue. "Faith" connotes a leap; I understand that as a leap from the evidence to the conclusion, covering a gap that cannot be covered by logical reasoning. It's that leap that I take issue with, regardless of which word you choose to label it with. You've repeatedly recommended a book of apologetics throughout the thread. If I could make a recommendation in turn: Critique of Religion and Philosophy, by Walter Kaufmann. I think it can give you much to think about, and from a reasonably friendly perspective.
- belluchan 13y ago

sdegutis 13y ago

I should also point out that, after my initial conversion to Christianity, "how I feel about it" is basically not a factor in what I believe. There are many times when I felt miserable and strongly wished I wasn't a Christian anymore. But I couldn't just choose to disbelieve in something that my research had convinced me was objectively true.