RE: *trigger warning* What if atheism's not all it seems?
December 4, 2017 at 12:29 pm
(This post was last modified: December 4, 2017 at 12:30 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
(December 2, 2017 at 12:52 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I'm curious, PhilosophicalZebra, if it were shown that believing that 2 + 2 = 5 led to improved mental well-being, would you commit yourself to believing that 2 + 2 = 5?
You seem more concerned with the consequences of believing than you do with whether or not the belief is true.
Interesting example. At the same time it is not unreasonable to note that ideas have consequences. If someone did believe 2+2=5 he would probably have difficulty managing his finances, etc. Similarly many anti-theists on this forum seem to feel (contrary the empirical benefits of belief) that theism results in various personal and social ills. While Appealing to Consequences is technically a logical fallacy there are two very good reasons to take consequences into account.
First, at least half of the brain processes information with intuition. I don't think this should be discounted. Intuition is a useful check on the logical side of our brain that just as often errs by rationalizing some desire rather than providing a truly objective analysis. Personally, I think it is wise to view strongly counter-intuitive conclusions with suspicion. Examples of these would be notions like solipsism and eliminative materialism.
Second, making note of consequences is one of the foundations of empiricism. The consequences of a purely rational analysis, particularly with respect to questions of value, are often disastrous in practice. Examples include the Cultural Revolution in China, the Reign of Terror in revolutionary France, and Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal". If any rational analysis forces us to abandon basic concepts like human dignity and personal autonomy, we might want to view that analysis with suspicion also.
My personal opinions about the relationship between atheism and nihilism are well-known and need no elaboration; however, I would suggest that people treat the Argument from Consequences the same way we should Occam's razor, not as a definitive rule, but rather as a cautionary guide.
