Peace...
(Warning relatively long post..)
We all gather information in multiple ways. As individuals we tend to have our choice approach to what we choose to believe and how we arrive at such choices. We all have a epistemological stance which is developed by factors such as education, experience, cultural practices, etc.
For many, rationalizing to firm truth is the only way to go...For others there is nothing more convincing than experience.
Most religious people opt for a combination of the two, however the distribution of experience over rationalization heavily favors experience. A believer typically is brought closer to the doctrine through episodes of experiencing what they perceive as God on a personal level. The experience alone is convincing, however often the belief is further buttressed by study and rationalization. The objective as it relates to any rationalization is supporting the experience with proofs, such as positive feelings which resulted as a direct outcome of the experience, and demonstrating the veracity of the doctrininal aspects of the religion.
Let us say you meet someone, you talk for hours, dance, dine, and laugh together and when the night is over you agree to another date. Afterward you conclude.."I think this person really likes me"...The experience led the way to this belief, reasoning firmed the position. "Why else would they spend so much time with me, laugh at my jokes, and agree to another date?".
For many theists, through prayer and an invitation, what they perceive as God enters into their lives. A relitionship is formed, and through this relationship which includes praying for assistance and guidance and subsequently finding relief in one form or another, the relationship is concretized and belief becomes justified.
Lets ask the obvious question...Is it really God entering into the person's life, or is it an illusion created and substantiated by mere belief? This seems like a great question...Now let me change a few terms around and show you why believers aren't falling over themselves to ask the question in this manner...Let us return to the scenario where you meet someone and after the experience instead of being convinced that you are liked, you begin to ask "Does the person really like me and want to spend time with me or am I making these things up?" Would you investigate? Would you call the person and ask them to prove it to you? Wouild you ask them to prove that they weren't really faking it? Or would you dare not do this because you do not wish to jeopardize the continuation of a very beneficial relationship?
Atheists...you are asking believers to question God while they are benefitting from belief. You are asking Believers to critically examine something which they have come to know by experience. There is no motivation to critically examine the belief from your direction as an atheist..They are examining with the intent of proving the doctrine. They like it..It works for them.
There are few ways to break through, the screaming and top of the lungs approach wont work since it is difficult convincing someone that their experiences are not real and that the benefits aren't real. One way to do this would be convincing the person to change their epistemological stance in general..To stop accepting experiences as real no matter how convincing until they have proven them first and foremost by the agency or reason..The only problem I see one facing is this scenario is dealing with the fact that most of us accept as highly probable, the things we experience.
Whirling Moat
(Warning relatively long post..)
We all gather information in multiple ways. As individuals we tend to have our choice approach to what we choose to believe and how we arrive at such choices. We all have a epistemological stance which is developed by factors such as education, experience, cultural practices, etc.
For many, rationalizing to firm truth is the only way to go...For others there is nothing more convincing than experience.
Most religious people opt for a combination of the two, however the distribution of experience over rationalization heavily favors experience. A believer typically is brought closer to the doctrine through episodes of experiencing what they perceive as God on a personal level. The experience alone is convincing, however often the belief is further buttressed by study and rationalization. The objective as it relates to any rationalization is supporting the experience with proofs, such as positive feelings which resulted as a direct outcome of the experience, and demonstrating the veracity of the doctrininal aspects of the religion.
Let us say you meet someone, you talk for hours, dance, dine, and laugh together and when the night is over you agree to another date. Afterward you conclude.."I think this person really likes me"...The experience led the way to this belief, reasoning firmed the position. "Why else would they spend so much time with me, laugh at my jokes, and agree to another date?".
For many theists, through prayer and an invitation, what they perceive as God enters into their lives. A relitionship is formed, and through this relationship which includes praying for assistance and guidance and subsequently finding relief in one form or another, the relationship is concretized and belief becomes justified.
Lets ask the obvious question...Is it really God entering into the person's life, or is it an illusion created and substantiated by mere belief? This seems like a great question...Now let me change a few terms around and show you why believers aren't falling over themselves to ask the question in this manner...Let us return to the scenario where you meet someone and after the experience instead of being convinced that you are liked, you begin to ask "Does the person really like me and want to spend time with me or am I making these things up?" Would you investigate? Would you call the person and ask them to prove it to you? Wouild you ask them to prove that they weren't really faking it? Or would you dare not do this because you do not wish to jeopardize the continuation of a very beneficial relationship?
Atheists...you are asking believers to question God while they are benefitting from belief. You are asking Believers to critically examine something which they have come to know by experience. There is no motivation to critically examine the belief from your direction as an atheist..They are examining with the intent of proving the doctrine. They like it..It works for them.
There are few ways to break through, the screaming and top of the lungs approach wont work since it is difficult convincing someone that their experiences are not real and that the benefits aren't real. One way to do this would be convincing the person to change their epistemological stance in general..To stop accepting experiences as real no matter how convincing until they have proven them first and foremost by the agency or reason..The only problem I see one facing is this scenario is dealing with the fact that most of us accept as highly probable, the things we experience.
Whirling Moat
