RE: Theists - I want to know what you think
May 10, 2018 at 2:15 pm
(This post was last modified: May 10, 2018 at 2:21 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
(May 8, 2018 at 7:50 am)alpha male Wrote: Surely you've seen people here say that even if god were proven to exist, they wouldn't worship. It's much more comfortable to not believe, than to believe but be in open rebellion.
You're conflating worship and belief there. Even if those people wouldn't worship (hence why they are anti-theists rather than atheists) they would still believe. Belief is not a choice. Either you are convinced or you are not. There is no such thing as refusing to believe (or choosing to believe) via 'open rebellion'. Belief isn't like that.
Personally I think it's irrational to say that you wouldn't worship a God that was threatening you with eternal hellfire. Just as it's irrational to say two people who are starving on an island won't try to each other. Moral stances only last so long before the survival instinct kicks in. Then again, you could say that your self, the real you, the you above the reptilian brain... wouldn't be choosing to worship. Like, choices out of instinct aren't really made by 'you' per say. So if that's all the anti-theist means then they're not irrational.
(May 8, 2018 at 7:50 am)alpha male Wrote: People convert, but usually it's based on emotion or intuition rather than evidence.
And I wonder why that is?
(May 8, 2018 at 9:13 am)SteveII Wrote: Yes, lacking belief in God is rational. You have not been presented incontrovertible proof to the contrary and as such a reasonable position to hold. However, such a position is a tacit admission of all kinds of gaps in your worldview--whether you know/admit they exist or not.
There's no gap for atheists such as myself who believe in a first cause.
You may say there's a gap because we don't know what the first cause is.
But (1) Pretending to know what it is is not the correct response. (2) Is it really a gap if it's a gap that is perhaps impossible to fill? Perhaps there are some things that are unknowable? And perhaps the nature of the first cause is one of those things?
