rational naturalism is impossible!

[Whateverist]

I have no problem conceding that rationality cannot support itself. So lets just throw that sucker out. However, why should that reflect more poorly on naturalism than on whacko superstition? What reason do you think you have for embracing the supernatural?

Now just because I can't use rationality alone to justify my embrace of naturalism doesn't lead to the conclusion that naturalism should be rejected. Are you claiming otherwise? And what exactly do you propose should replace rationality? Are you against rationality in all cases, or only when it is used to support the rejection of God?

I ask because you surely do seem to be going to great pains to make a rational argument. Given the thesis of your argument, why do you bother? If you are persuaded by your own argument, what gives? If not, then we have that at least in common.

None of the OP applies to the theist who believes a personal god created them in a way that their cognitive functions are reliable...

But is it rational for the theist or anyone else to believe a personal god created them with their cognitive functioning wired correctly? Do theists suppose that God just screwed up when wiring the brains of atheists? Rationality is in no position to support itself but then what of belief in genies? Believers can no more justify their belief in genies by faith. That is subject to same problem of circularity as rationality.

Better to just stop the attempt to catch our own tails, whether by faith or rationality. Why not simply admit that in the end each man chooses those beliefs which seem most fit given his circumstances? I cannot prove my belief in a natural world devoid of genies without appealing to some premise which depends on the individual. The same is true for every faithful follower of any supernatural system.

The level 7 atheist may balk at this concession but as an agnostic with no belief in gods, I am happy to.