7 ms·

Good read! The critique shows that belief in God is not an easy thing to toss aside/refute as one might think. Boghossian: “You need to become comfortable in

Good read! The critique shows that belief in God is not an easy thing to toss aside/refute as one might think. Boghossian: “You need to become comfortable in not knowing and not pretending to know . . . “ Good advice!

lotsofpulp 6y ago
Wouldn’t that be an agnostic rather than an atheist?
- b_t_s 6y ago
  If being an atheist required 100% certainty, then only the omniscient could be atheist(and presumably only a deity can be omniscient, making atheism a paradox). In practice, most of us draw the line somewhere around "highly unlikely".
  - tines 6y ago
    Yes, even Richard Dawkins described himself as being "6 out of 7" sure that God doesn't exist (or something like that), but I think he should still be called an atheist.
    - pwinnski 6y ago
      Many (most?) Christians are really only about 6 out of 7 sure that they're on the right track, too, and that doesn't seem to make them into something else, either.
      - tines 6y ago
        Of course. And the confession "Lord, I believe; help thou my unbelief" in Mark 9:24 was apparently good enough for Jesus.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    The definition of agnostic seems closer to “not knowing and not pretending to know” to me than an atheist. Although, I guess my personal definition has been that theist assumes a higher being exists, an atheist assumes no higher being exists, and agnostic assumes nothing.
    - barrucadu 6y ago
      Unfortunately, "atheism" is a broad term which covers both people who do not believe in a higher power, and people who claim that no higher powers exist.
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        What is the difference between not believing in a higher power and claiming no higher power exists?
        barrucadu 6y ago
        I lack a belief that there is a person in Argentina called Smergold Abrahamson, as that is a ridiculous name and I have no reason to believe that they exist. But I'm not going to claim with certainty that they don't.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        I think the word believe is unnecessarily complicating this. As I stated above in another comment, assumption is a better word to use than believe, so substituting that gives: “I do not assume that there is a person in Argentina called Smergold Abrahamson, as that is a ridiculous name. But I am not going to claim with certainty that they do not exist”. Which is more concisely re-written as: “I assume there is a very low probability of the existence of a person in Argentina called Smergold Abrahamson”. Which going back to the original comment, I see the difference now: “not believing (assuming) in a higher power” is different than “claiming (assuming) no higher power exists”
    - soylentcola 6y ago
- kaladin_1 6y ago
  An agnostic neither affirms nor denies the existence of God. But atheist affirms with certainty the non-existence of God. In my estimation, the critique of the book did a good job of showing that Boghossian could do with Boghossian's advice: “You need to become comfortable in not knowing and not pretending to know . . . “ Boghossian hasn't sufficiently proven there is no God...
  - wtetzner 6y ago
    > An agnostic neither affirms nor denies the existence of God. But atheist affirms with certainty the non-existence of God. Is that accurate? I thought being atheist just meant you don't believe in a deity.
mrkeen 6y ago
> The critique shows that belief in God is not an easy thing to toss aside/refute as one might think. It really is. You're already doing it for all supernatural entities (past, present and future) not going by the name 'God'.
- kaladin_1 6y ago
  I don't see how that's so. Could you explain? Some examples, the fine-tuning argument, the origin of everything, the immense order observable in nature and Mathematics. These aren't very easy to explain away as coming from some random chaos.
  - mrkeen 6y ago
    And they say back then our universe Was an empty sea, until a silver fox And her cunning mate began to sing A song that became the world we know[1] Having read that, did it become part of your worldview? Or did you dismiss it? [1] Björk - Cosmogeny
  - myWindoonn 6y ago
    There is a mythical incident in the Old Testament where worshippers of Apis [0] are slaughtered by their brothers, who had freshly declared allegiance to Jehovah. In general, the rise of monolatric religions in the Levant and Persia, religions where there are many deities but only one is worshipped, eventually turned to monotheism, where those other deities were derided and ignored. With this change, there were sweeping new priestly laws which insisted that it was blasphemous to worship those other deities. You might be interested in a critical retelling of the Exodus [1] which puts in an effort to mention and understand the other deities which were worshipped around the time of these events. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apis_(deity) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apis_(deity) [1] https://vimeo.com/263398514 https://vimeo.com/263398514
heresie-dabord 6y ago
> "you have good reasons to think that what you believe is true" These "good reasons" always seem to be, "I'll feel lost if I don't adhere to and/or profess this superstition." Atheism has no answer to this psychological vulnerability and feeling of "lostness", except to say "man up, woman up, this is life and these are its bounds." My objection is not that superstition exists or that it comforts some people. My objection to the practice of superstition is that it misguidedly imposes itself on public policy.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

Wouldn’t that be an agnostic rather than an atheist?

b_t_s 6y ago
If being an atheist required 100% certainty, then only the omniscient could be atheist(and presumably only a deity can be omniscient, making atheism a paradox). In practice, most of us draw the line somewhere around "highly unlikely".
- tines 6y ago
  Yes, even Richard Dawkins described himself as being "6 out of 7" sure that God doesn't exist (or something like that), but I think he should still be called an atheist.
  - pwinnski 6y ago
    Many (most?) Christians are really only about 6 out of 7 sure that they're on the right track, too, and that doesn't seem to make them into something else, either.
    - tines 6y ago
      Of course. And the confession "Lord, I believe; help thou my unbelief" in Mark 9:24 was apparently good enough for Jesus.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  The definition of agnostic seems closer to “not knowing and not pretending to know” to me than an atheist. Although, I guess my personal definition has been that theist assumes a higher being exists, an atheist assumes no higher being exists, and agnostic assumes nothing.
  - barrucadu 6y ago
    Unfortunately, "atheism" is a broad term which covers both people who do not believe in a higher power, and people who claim that no higher powers exist.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      What is the difference between not believing in a higher power and claiming no higher power exists?
      - barrucadu 6y ago
        I lack a belief that there is a person in Argentina called Smergold Abrahamson, as that is a ridiculous name and I have no reason to believe that they exist. But I'm not going to claim with certainty that they don't.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        I think the word believe is unnecessarily complicating this. As I stated above in another comment, assumption is a better word to use than believe, so substituting that gives: “I do not assume that there is a person in Argentina called Smergold Abrahamson, as that is a ridiculous name. But I am not going to claim with certainty that they do not exist”. Which is more concisely re-written as: “I assume there is a very low probability of the existence of a person in Argentina called Smergold Abrahamson”. Which going back to the original comment, I see the difference now: “not believing (assuming) in a higher power” is different than “claiming (assuming) no higher power exists”
  - soylentcola 6y ago
kaladin_1 6y ago
An agnostic neither affirms nor denies the existence of God. But atheist affirms with certainty the non-existence of God. In my estimation, the critique of the book did a good job of showing that Boghossian could do with Boghossian's advice: “You need to become comfortable in not knowing and not pretending to know . . . “ Boghossian hasn't sufficiently proven there is no God...
- wtetzner 6y ago
  > An agnostic neither affirms nor denies the existence of God. But atheist affirms with certainty the non-existence of God. Is that accurate? I thought being atheist just meant you don't believe in a deity.

mrkeen 6y ago

> The critique shows that belief in God is not an easy thing to toss aside/refute as one might think. It really is. You're already doing it for all supernatural entities (past, present and future) not going by the name 'God'.

kaladin_1 6y ago
I don't see how that's so. Could you explain? Some examples, the fine-tuning argument, the origin of everything, the immense order observable in nature and Mathematics. These aren't very easy to explain away as coming from some random chaos.
- mrkeen 6y ago
  And they say back then our universe Was an empty sea, until a silver fox And her cunning mate began to sing A song that became the world we know[1] Having read that, did it become part of your worldview? Or did you dismiss it? [1] Björk - Cosmogeny
- myWindoonn 6y ago
  There is a mythical incident in the Old Testament where worshippers of Apis [0] are slaughtered by their brothers, who had freshly declared allegiance to Jehovah. In general, the rise of monolatric religions in the Levant and Persia, religions where there are many deities but only one is worshipped, eventually turned to monotheism, where those other deities were derided and ignored. With this change, there were sweeping new priestly laws which insisted that it was blasphemous to worship those other deities. You might be interested in a critical retelling of the Exodus [1] which puts in an effort to mention and understand the other deities which were worshipped around the time of these events. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apis_(deity) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apis_(deity) [1] https://vimeo.com/263398514 https://vimeo.com/263398514

heresie-dabord 6y ago

> "you have good reasons to think that what you believe is true" These "good reasons" always seem to be, "I'll feel lost if I don't adhere to and/or profess this superstition." Atheism has no answer to this psychological vulnerability and feeling of "lostness", except to say "man up, woman up, this is life and these are its bounds." My objection is not that superstition exists or that it comforts some people. My objection to the practice of superstition is that it misguidedly imposes itself on public policy.