(February 8, 2011 at 8:50 am)Matthew Wrote: I take the existence of God to be what's known as a basic belief which supports all other beliefs, and that without that basic belief we are unable to rationally believe anything. I thus reason from God's existence, not to it. [This means that I take a particular epistemological view called foundationalism, which says that a belief is rational if it is basic or it is ultimately supported by at least one basic belief.]
This attitude is very difficult for me to understand, and part of the reason I started the thread that OnlyNatural linked to. I also want to avoid having this thread drift into a rehashing of that one. I would like to ask a bit more broadly on how it is you conclude that your belief in your idea of a god is a foundation for anything else, be it logic, morality, meaning, human rights, or whatever.
For me, God is a sentiment that grows out of a sense of awe over what I perceive as a grand machine that I'm part of. It's the cherry on the sundae, the star on top the Christmas tree, or whatever decorative pinnacle analogy you like. Hence, I can come to the same conclusions about morality, reason, human rights, democracy, etc that an atheist might (including the aforementioned sense of awe of the natural universe) and my "worldview" would not be greatly shaken were I to ever be convinced that God isn't real.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
