(December 25, 2018 at 8:41 pm)Dimmesdale Wrote: I exist too. I believe the existence of "myself" is self-authenticating. But even though it is incontrovertible, for another person it may not be incontrovertible insofar as their "opinion" goes. Some may deny it altogether and not even give a hearing to it. This is in spite of the fact that they suppress what is self-evident. I do not say that that is my opinion, though it can be taken as such, but I believe (rightly) that it is the truth.
One has to take into account standards of evidence, and not everyone possesses the same standard of evidence. For someone who rejects things like logic and things that are self-evident, forms of authority and so on, it may be impossible to even begin with the preliminaries of formulating an argument, a justification for beliefs.
Let's go beyond my own existence, how do I believe in other minds (besides my own) at all? There is a consensus among most human beings that there are other minds. We at least act as though there are. But what is the proof of this? At bottom, we only believe it because it is accepted, because others believe it, or due to some kind of existential knowledge. So let's extend that sort of scope of what is evident regarding the divine. I believe, based upon similar common sense, that some kind of Supreme Being or Essence exists, and that knowledge of this being, even only that of a "bare-bones" variety, is natural to our reasoning capacities and personal psyches. I extend my standard of evidence broader than others. And I more than believe, I know, that I am correct and others (atheists) are not, in this regard.
We believe there are other minds because we see other people moving around, talking, and acting in ways that show they have minds. They act in complicated ways that show the existence of internal states and motivations involving planning and long-term goals. That is the evidence for other minds.
What evidence can you provide that there is a divine? What do you see, hear, touch, feel, or taste that provides evidence for the existence of a divine that is *anywhere* comparable to the above evidence for other minds? You claim it is based on 'common sense', but common sense dictates that we should limit our claims of existence to those things that have obsevable evidence supporting them.
Humans are quite prone to any number of illusions and illogical leaps in thinking. That many people 'feel' the existence of a deity is very far from proof of the existence of such a deity *especially* when the claimed properties of such deities conflict on almost every point.
Let's give an example. Suppose you are color blind, for specificity red-green color blind. How could you learn that the claims people make for the difference between red and green is real? Well, you can observe that many people make this claim. That alone is not enough--they could be delusional or simply under some sort of illusory mechanism. But, after looking a bit more, you find that they are *consistent* in their evaluations of red and green. So, one person may claim an apple is red (which you cannot detect). And it then turns out that *other* people will agree that this particular apple is red. Even when there is no communication between the people involved, they will still agree that the apple is red. Similarly for a green apple (which looks identical to you): people who claim to see red and green will be agree between themselves about which are red and which are green even if there is no communication allowed between the people questioned.
On the other hand, when it comes to the divine, there are literally thousands of mutually contradictory claims concerning its nature made by those who claim to see such divinity. pretty much any two people who claim to experience the divine will disagree about most particulars, even if allowed to discuss with each other, let alone if they are prevented from such. Instead of the consistency of red and green, which can be determined even by someone who is color blind, the claims of divinity have almost no consistency at all.
This is strong evidence that the experience of the divine *isn't* an experience of reality, but simply a common malfunction of how the human mind works, like a sort of optical illusion.
This does *not* deny that you have some sort of experience. I believe you do. But it *does* deny that your interpretation of that experience is valid.
