Hi from Logikos

[Logikos]

So perhaps you could give an example of a truth which I would be unable to arrive at because of my theistic belief (that does not presuppose that theistic belief is false).

The truth that the belief in god(s) is delusional. It is not a matter of presupposing that theistic belief is false. It is a matter of seeking the truth. That quest for 'truth' has discovered absolutely no evidence (to my knowledge) that any claims of the existence of deities are true. It has, however, uncovered a lot of evidence that the existence of god(s) is not necessarily the answer and, indeed, is not necessary at all. The God contention has not (cannot be) disproved, but there has never been a satisfactory reason to believe presented (again, to my knowledge). Therefore, belief is irrational at best.

So how exactly does the generalisation follow?

It follows, because that is what a generalization is. The generalization is this: There is no rational reason to believe in god(s), therefore holding that belief is irrational, delusional, wishful thinking, etc.

I see, so you take "irrational" and "delusional" to be synonymous (they are clearly not). All theists are irrational and so all theists have delusions. Non sequitur.

You state that you are not aware of any evidence for the existence of God. Does it therefore follow that all theists are irrational? No. For one, the criterion that a person is rational only if there is evidence for all their beliefs is self-refuting: there is no evidence for believing that "a person is rational only if there is evidence for all their beliefs". But even if we accept the criterion, the fact that you are not aware of any evidence does not mean that no evidence exists, or that theists are not aware of any evidence.

Logikos

P.S. You keep talking about "rational beliefs", but rationality is a property of people not beliefs or arguments. Beliefs are either true or false, not rational or irrational. Someone can be rational and still hold to false beliefs, and vice versa. You've also said that some beliefs are "delusional" which again is something only people can be. I know this sounds a bit pedantic, but if you're going to make a convincing argument that "all theists are delusional" it is not enough to show that there are no good reasons for theistic belief - you need to show that all theists have delusions.

---

Yes.

Using "delusion" as:

delusion |diˈloō zh ən|
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder

So theistic belief is:

• idiosyncratic?
  
• always firmly maintained?
  
• contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or "rational argument"?