(November 22, 2016 at 12:19 pm)operator Wrote: I think one can choose to believe in something despite a complete lack of evidence for that something. But I don't think one can choose disbelief.

I would say that they do have "evidence", of some sort. Just not what a critical thinker would call evidence. I don't think someone can randomly choose to believe something that they didn't a minute ago, without something happening to bring about that change of mind. For many theists, everything is evidence, because they've been indoctrinated into thinking so.

As in my dragon example, I don't think any sane person can suddenly decide they believe in dragons based on nothing.

An important point is that anyone can say they believe something. I expect there are a lot of theists who say they believe certain things because their religion requires them to, but that they don't actually believe them.

(November 22, 2016 at 12:19 pm)operator Wrote: I think one can choose to believe in something despite a complete lack of evidence for that something. But I don't think one can choose disbelief.

Sure you can. It's like shopping for shoes and deciding not to buy a pair. In this case we are talking about someone who is reflecting on the proposition "Is there a god?" At that point there's no returning to some default state of benign ignorance. He or she must either weight the pros & cons or not bother. To answer in the negative is to decide against it.

(November 22, 2016 at 12:47 pm)robvalue Wrote: I would say that they do have "evidence", of some sort. Just not what a critical thinker would call evidence. I don't think someone can randomly choose to believe something that they didn't a minute ago, without something happening to bring about that change of mind. For many theists, everything is evidence, because they've been indoctrinated into thinking so.

As in my dragon example, I don't think any sane person can suddenly decide they believe in dragons based on nothing.

An important point is that anyone can say they believe something. I expect there are a lot of theists who say they believe certain things because their religion requires them to, but that they don't actually believe them.

True but one can choose to do certain things to keep their beliefs alive. One can choose to ignore certain lines of evidence or choose to remain uneducated on certain subjects because they believe in believing. Lacking a belief in a god is different because I would argue most atheists have reviewed the "evidence" that religion has presented and have seen the logical fallacies therein.

(November 22, 2016 at 4:22 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Sure you can. It's like shopping for shoes and deciding not to buy a pair. In this case we are talking about someone who is reflecting on the proposition "Is there a god?" At that point there's no returning to some default state of benign ignorance. He or she must either weight the pros & cons or not bother. To answer in the negative is to decide against it.

I do not "decide against" the idea of god. You're implying that believe in the existence of god is the default position and I just don't buy that for a second. I simply do not believe the claims made by religion because, honestly make no sense. I mean I could choose to go to church every sunday and read the bible, etc. etc. but that does not change the fact that the idea of god makes no sense to me. I cannot choose that it doesn't make sense - it simply doesn't make sense to my mind.

If you never told a child about any gods or religions I think they would be an atheist their whole life. Does that mean they are 'deciding against' god? No.

(November 22, 2016 at 12:10 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(November 22, 2016 at 10:30 am)robvalue Wrote: No, theists don't choose to become atheists. They lose their belief, as the result of a series of events.

Generalize much? The deconverted atheist does so by some series of choices. I know I did.

I never  believed.

(November 22, 2016 at 4:57 pm)operator Wrote:

(November 22, 2016 at 4:22 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Sure you can. It's like shopping for shoes and deciding not to buy a pair. In this case we are talking about someone who is reflecting on the proposition "Is there a god?" At that point there's no returning to some default state of benign ignorance. He or she must either weight the pros & cons or not bother. To answer in the negative is to decide against it.

I do not "decide against" the idea of god. You're implying that believe in the existence of god is the default position and I just don't buy that for a second. I simply do not believe the claims made by religion because, honestly make no sense. I mean I could choose to go to church every sunday and read the bible, etc. etc. but that does not change the fact that the idea of god makes no sense to me. I cannot choose that it doesn't make sense - it simply doesn't make sense to my mind.

If you never told a child about any gods or religions I think they would be an atheist their whole life. Does that mean they are 'deciding against' god? No.

Please re-read my post carefully. It isn't about people who never thought about the issue. If the doctrines presented to you don't make sense, that is a judgment you have made based on your own reason and experience. People hear ideas and they decide if the ideas make sense or not. They are deliberately taking a stance either "I agree," or "I disagree," or "I don't know". That's a choice.

(November 22, 2016 at 5:30 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(November 22, 2016 at 12:10 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Generalize much? The deconverted atheist does so by some series of choices. I know I did.

I never  believed.

Then you never deconverted, did you?

(November 22, 2016 at 5:33 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Please re-read my post carefully. It isn't about people who never thought about the issue. If the doctrines presented to you don't make sense, that is a judgment you have made based on your own reason and experience. People hear ideas and they decide if the ideas make sense or not. They are deliberately taking a stance either "I agree," or "I disagree," or "I don't know". That's a choice.

I understood you completely and I'm still telling you that it is not a choice. I don't choose for it to not make sense to me, it just doesn't make sense to me. I can choose to utter the words, "I disagree," but that's simply a vocalization of my state of mind. I didn't choose to stop believing in god one day, I simply realized that none of it made sense to me.

In other words it was a realization about how my mind works and being honest with myself about that realization. It was not a choice to stop believing. I could not choose for the idea of god to make sense to me now. and I couldn't then.

(November 22, 2016 at 5:33 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(November 22, 2016 at 5:30 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: I never  believed.

Then you never deconverted, did you?

Go back to the statement about theists loving their faith to become atheists. I was pointing out that this is just one route.

(November 22, 2016 at 5:37 pm)operator Wrote:

(November 22, 2016 at 5:33 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Please re-read my post carefully. It isn't about people who never thought about the issue. If the doctrines presented to you don't make sense, that is a judgment you have made based on your own reason and experience. People hear ideas and they decide if the ideas make sense or not. They are deliberately taking a stance either "I agree," or "I disagree," or "I don't know". That's a choice.

I understood you completely and I'm still telling you that it is not a choice. I don't choose for it to not make sense to me, it just doesn't make sense to me. I can choose to utter the words, "I disagree," but that's simply a vocalization of my state of mind. I didn't choose to stop believing in god one day, I simply realized that none of it made sense to me.

In other words it was a realization about how my mind works and being honest with myself about that realization. It was not a choice to stop believing. I could not choose for the idea of god to make sense to me now. and I couldn't then.

Thanks for sharing. Fair enough. By that same reasoning could I not similarly say that I did not choose to believe in God; but rather, the philosophy I studied convinced me that He exists? After my studies I did not choose to believe because it just made sense. Seemed obvious actually.

(November 22, 2016 at 11:45 am)robvalue Wrote: A belief doesn't have to be based on no evidence. It says especially, not only. You're a theist, you believe God exists. Belief is a subset of knowledge, so if you think you know God exists, then of course you also believe it. You're using a partial definition now.

My lack of belief is based not only on a lack of evidence, it's based on a lack of a falsifiable definition. Without one, there can be no evidence. I have no idea what a God is meant to be, nor how I could identify one.

You're trying to say a belief is just a guess. So sure, if I guess at something, I can take another guess instead. But people generally have some sort of reason for their beliefs. If you base yours on guesses only, then that's up to you.

*emphasis mine*

Belief is not a subset of knowledge, belief exists in the absence of knowledge. Is the fact that gravity exists based on belief or knowledge?

(November 22, 2016 at 11:45 am)robvalue Wrote: I firmly believe the cartoon characters from the bible are not real, because they violate everything I've ever observed, as well as being internally inconsistent. Reality does not correlate with them, and the stories therein are a load of nonsense. They are a very specific claim, for which I would expect to see a ton of evidence everywhere, and I see none.

The above is criteria you CHOOSE to place on yourself to form your own OPINION of what you believe is or is not true; However the universe or anything that exists apart from the universe is not defined by the opinion of Robvalue.