13 Questions

[Angrboda]

Ok, so I have written up a questionnaire for you all. You do not have to answer each of the questions, but I am interested in knowing what the different opinions of atheists are on these questions. It would be helpful if you explained your answers too, simple “yes” or “no” answers don’t really add much to the discussion. Thanks for filling this out!

P.S. Theists, feel free to answer these questions as well.

1. What evidence would convince you of God’s existence?

I do not know.

2. You see the words, “I love you” written in the sand at the beach. Is this man-made? If so, how do you know?

I presume you mean more generally, "How do I know it was made by an intelligence?" As man isn't necessarily the only mechanism capable of this feat. It could be man-made, ape-made (perhaps Washoe imitating her trainers), an alien, God, Satan, perhaps a poltergeist -- maybe the malevolent spirit of the dead woman from the Japanese horror movie "Ju-on". The conventional answer is that we infer human action by an artifact's possession of characteristics which we know characterize the acts of men -- though we would also need to rule out other possible agents or forces (e.g. symmetry is often inferred to be a sign of human activity, yet mushroom rings which grow in the forest have been incorrectly attributed to intelligent agency as a result of "over-interpreting" in this way). We know that humans create such beach artifacts, they show evidence of tool marks (whatever moved the sand thus, whether stick, hand or foot). So it's a process of ruling in (those things which are known to leave such traces on similar artifacts) and ruling things out (if God does not exist, it cannot be God; if the traces are fresh, it cannot have been Benjamin Franklin, as he's been dead too long.) Such inferences are by their nature speculative: we zero in on man because we have plenty of similar examples of the means, method and substance of the artifact, and we have no evidence of non-human artificers creating similar artifacts; but again, it's a hypothesis, not a deduction -- I have know way of knowing that this specific example artifact was not created by God who was taking time away from his Skeeball. In that instance, my inference turns out to be wrong.

3. If the God of the Bible were real, would He set the rules or would man set the rules?

I don't believe the "God of the Bible" is in control of anything. If he sets morality, it is along the prong of Euthyphro's Dilemma marked, "whatever I do is good, for I am God, hear me roar." No, really. I haven't given the question of the God of the Bible much consideration -- he's always changing. People claim to know what the Bible says, who the God of the Bible is and what his meaning and intent are. These people are fools. I'm sure God has a special place in hell reserved people who think they know exactly who he is. Some strains of Kabbalism postulate seven levels of meaning in the text, and it can take a lifetime to penetrate just a few of them. As a follower of a faith based on mysticism, the meaning of the "sacred" texts I subscribe to, like the bible, are a bottomless well -- you can drink from them forever and they will not run dry [Note 1]. As such I have more respect for the likes of Dame Julian of Norwich, St. John of the Cross, or the likes of the anonymous author of "The Cloud Of Unknowing" -- far more, than yahoos who claim to "know God" through the bible. Before I could hope to answer your question, I would have to know exactly who "the God of the Bible" is -- and that is something no one else can tell me.

[Note 1]: Specifically the Tao Te Ching and the so-called "Inner Chapters" of the Chuang Tse (aka the Zhuangzi; the inner chapters are so named as the surrounding chapters are presumed to be pseudoepigraphic); The Art Of War by Sun Tzu is another example of a text with unlimited depth.

4. Do moral laws exist? If so, do they exist independent of humans? How do you know what they are?

Yes, depending on what you mean by "moral laws". I have recently -- just this past week, to be precise -- have had a perfect storm of influences and insight which I believe points the way for a naturalistic understanding of meaning and morality. I am not going to go into the details. I am still in the process of writing them up, and the answers will likely run to many pages of ideas. (I have outlined the general essay, and counting double space between items, the outline alone is longer than a page; and once I finish, I may attempt publication. For now, I'll just have to remain a shameless tease. )

5. If everyone on earth believed that rape were morally right, would it still be morally wrong?

Depends on who you mean by "everyone" -- I presume you mean homo sapiens sapiens, and not any non-human entities (whether natural or supernatural). I'm sure after centuries of using cows for meat, they would be delighted to turn the tables and go in for a round of human raping (and I'm not sure I would blame them; social theories of justice have their consequences). Now, if everyone -- every human -- believed this. In the current context, it would be wrong. But contexts may change. If the male population were reduced to a few hundred individuals globally, one might have to reconsider the moral trade-off between rape and human extinction. I'm not sure what my new theory would say, as it is largely a "grand theory of almost everything", and the specific way it plays out in the particular is beyond my ken. The larger picture is that evolution builds some morals into us, and that would not change with the context; however the framework is not static, and context might matter. Again, the details are so far removed from the generalities that certainty cannot be had, but my intuition is that none of the relevant factors would change, and thus the morality currently on display would not be changed in any relevant aspects -- rape would remain immoral, regardless of what people choose. (Remember though, in biblical times, under God, rape was moral, in the context of war and conquest. Small changes can yield profound effects/changes, ala chaos theory and the butterfly effect.)

6. What is the most dangerous religion on Earth?

The belief that we are fundamentally rational creatures. (That science describes reality is certainly in the running, but far behind the afore-mentioned. Religions are social creations and reflect the social conscience, enlightenment and reality of the believer. It is like the history of nations such as Russia and China. Attempts were made to "fast-forward" the society into modernity and 'First-world' class status; many people suffered horrendously as a result. You can't force fit progress and enlightenment on nations or people -- they will come to it in their own time. In the meantime, we must all help each other help ourselves.)

7. Where did the laws of logic come from?

That's a part of my grand TOE (Theory Of Everything). The laws of logic as expressed by men are an expression of natural forms of order pre-existing in the universe. In terms you might better understand, "the laws of logic are a reflection of the divine as expressed through certain other expressions of the divine, such as intelligent agents like man." For the details, you will just have to wait along with everybody else until I'm ready to spill.

8. How did non-rational events and processes lead to a rational human mind?

This is a stupid question and you know it. Most of these questions are borderline stupid, as most of these have been adequately answered. While I understand you feel compelled to field these stalking horses in hopes of surprising your quarry, don't treat us like fucking idiots. We deserve better than this. If your God is indeed God, a God worthy of worship, he will demand of his elect that they treat their fellow man with love. Treating your fellow man as if he didn't have a brain in his head is not love. It's simply acting like a shit. I can only hope your God shields his eyes and looks away.

9. Why do some atheists such as Carl Wieland and Alister McGrath become Christians?

Likely for reasons privy only to them -- assuming they did so. You have no window on their souls. Do you know for absolute certain that they are in fact who they say they are? No, you do not. Only God knows what is written in their hearts and in the Book of Life. Do you know that the reasons they give in public and private are the reasons written in their hearts? No, you do not. I wasn't aware Carl had jumped ship, but there are as many good reasons to be a Christian as there are good reasons not to be one. And I'm sure the bad reasons for both outnumber the good. I'll tell you what. You explain why I became a Taoist, and I'll take a stab at understanding Carl's public confessions on the matter. Failing that, don't be a hypocrite and ask us to do what you aren't willing to face going the other direction. But then, I have every confidence that you are sure you know why I no longer believe in God and follow the Tao (if you are indeed Calvinist, that would be arrogant in the extreme, claiming to know what God has written in his heart. How obscene!).

10. How do beliefs and thoughts differ?

There are multiple frameworks I have for the question: conventional naive phenomenological understanding, my TOE, some recent ideas about the nature of the psychological phenomena of "being certain", Humean empiricism, Kantian idealism, my theories on the nature of language and meaning from my younger days, or any of a range of epistemological stances current among philosophers. What flavor of "if you want a substantial answer, state your terms and ask a substantial question" would you like? Perhaps you'd like to answer a question my new TOE handles with aplomb: Why do we get distressed -- really emotionally upset -- when our favorite television character gets killed off at the end of the season (or even if the fate of the character is "left hanging"); why do we care about somebody/something we know doesn't exist?

11. Do you believe that God does not exist?

I have not yet met a god whom I believe exists. As noted, that doesn't rule out the divine, but it does rule out supernatural sources of it that I have heretofore encountered. But then, tomorrow is another day. I have only met an infinitesimal sample of all possible Gods.

12. Do you think that God does not exist?

Specific Gods, yes, many I am convinced do not exist. Any arbitrary god or the potential of a god which departs significantly from the likes men have been inventing since time immemorial, it is impossible to say.

13. How do you think life began on Earth?

I don't have a guess, scientific, theological or otherwise.