starting in the wrong place (The atheist delusion)

by dhw, Monday, May 26, 2008, 13:42 (6023 days ago) @ Curtis

Hrischuk compares the agnostic situation to investing in the stock market, and says "you must make up your mind about where to invest your money....or inflation will eat it up and you will be left with nothing." - The comparison is akin to Pascal's Wager (see Cary, Introduction expanded), but in my view it is based on a false premise. There is no "must", and the fear of being left with nothing is not a basis for faith in anything. The argument that one should weigh up the evidence, on the other hand, is totally fair. Unfortunately, atheists weigh it up and conclude that there is no God, theists weigh it up and conclude that there is a God, and agnostics weigh it up and conclude either that they don't know or that they can't know. "Evidence" is a matter of interpretation. Your claim that your '"web of evidence' is intended to provide enough evidence so that there is a very small fear of being wrong" is precisely the claim that the atheist Dawkins makes. But I am trying to answer you point by point, and here my argument is that the stock market analogy seems false to me. I am not under any compulsion to make up my mind (though I wish I could), and being left with nothing does not provide a criterion for truth. - You say "everyone has a religion and it requires faith. Atheism is a religion..." I agree that atheism requires faith, and have been castigated by the atheists for saying so. My argument may be different from yours, however. An atheist has to believe that life came about by chance, but as you rightly say in your posting to Cary (Introduction expanded), life is a difficult thing to create. That is an understatement. It requires enormous faith to believe in abiogenesis, and that is one major reason for my inability to embrace atheism. - You say that "Agnosticism is usually 'atheism by default'". I would certainly not have written the "brief guide" or set up the website if that were my own case. The fact that I cannot share the atheist's faith in chance means inevitably that I keep an open mind about there being a Creator. In the guide I have spent a good deal of time speculating on the nature of such a being (if he exists or existed), as revealed both in this world, in the Bible, and in other religions. I know of many agnostics who share this state of confusion and uncertainty. I don't take your question as an insult. I'm only surprised that you should ask it, in the context of the guide and the website. - You argue at some length that one "cannot disprove the existence of God". I don't think you need to construct such an elaborate case. Even atheists will agree with your statement, but will equate it with Russell's teapot (see the thread under teapot agnosticism). Not being able to disprove something does not mean that it exists. And as regards the Kalam Cosmological Argument, I have nothing further at this stage to add to my earlier comment. I'll be very interested to hear your response once ... as you say ... this item "closes out".
 
 To clarify my own position, then: I accept the possibility of a creator, but have grave doubts about his/her/its nature if there is/was one. I also accept the possibility that there is an afterlife, but I find it equally conceivable that this life is all we have. Unlike Cary, I am unable even to place a bet, but I am not (yet) prepared simply to wait and see. That's why I'm grateful to those like yourself who are willing to share their views, arguments and experiences.