(November 20, 2021 at 1:45 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: In the words of David Foster Wallace, however smart you think you are, you are probably way less smart than that. Also if your experiece of people with differing view comes from a debate forum then that also would skew one's perceptions. For the purpose of vigorous debate, I often present a degree of certainty I do not have. IMO Too many qualifiers distract from the main discussion points even if it comes off as smugness.
I do tire of hearing atheism being presented as the only rational position when in fact it is only as rational as the epistemic assumptions of the belief holder. I also do not accept the idea that atheism is the default, no burden of proof, position, since IMHO it is the couterintuitive one.
I think theism is a rational position. I am swayed by John Hick, who in an essay lays out a rational basis for theism. That basis? Direct experience. If I have direct experience that William Johnson exists (I see him every day at work, for example), then I don't need to pay any heed to skeptics about William Johnson.
The thing about that is, it only applies to mystics. If someone hasn't had direct experience of God, they have no rational basis.
