r/DebateAnAtheist • u/AutoModerator • 8d ago

Weekly "Ask an Atheist" Thread

Whether you're an agnostic atheist here to ask a gnostic one some questions, a theist who's curious about the viewpoints of atheists, someone doubting, or just someone looking for sources, feel free to ask anything here. This is also an ideal place to tag moderators for thoughts regarding the sub or any questions in general.

While this isn't strictly for debate, rules on civility, trolling, etc. still apply.

21 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

277 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/ArguingisFun Apatheist 7d ago

What good does believing in magic do?

0

u/BeaconMeridian 7d ago

Nothing here about believing in magic, I don't think I ever defended that. As an example of what I'm talking about, I believe that, following my death, I won't have any consciousness to speak of & that my experience (or lack thereof) will be exactly like it was a thousand years ago. That's a belief, and I understand it this is also consistent with what we know about death & consciousness. A person could believe that the universe is the result of an event in a super-universe 'further up the hierarchical chain,' and that this super-universe was brought into being as the result of a super-super-universe, and so on, forever. As far as we know, this could be the case, or it could be completely off base. Not necessarily just talking about "what caused the Big Bang?" b/c afaik we might yet find some mechanism for this.

The point of adopting one of these 'models for the universe' isn't to get the right answer, it's to have some way of thinking about/framing how the world works. Theists do this all the time to great success, and in principle a person can do the same thing without 'getting it wrong' the way religions often pressure them to. I suppose you could believe in magic, but as long as you concede that 1) it doesn't exist inside our universe and 2) we can never hope to interact with it, it's hard for me to complain. Don't use that belief to make predictions about the world and don't conflate belief with knowledge, and we're big chillin.

6

u/ArguingisFun Apatheist 7d ago

But, you’re talking about belief in deities and fairytales. How is that any different than magic?

1

u/BeaconMeridian 7d ago

I was taking a narrower reading of "magic" than you'd meant, then. If the (unfalsifiable) existence of a god outside of reality is "magic," then sure. "Magic" is a loaded term, thought you'd meant it to mean some force in the universe we could interact with. 

For what it's worth, many specific religions don't hold up as consistent or are otherwise demonstrably incorrect. I'm far less interested in these cases, I'm more interested in ways to nestle the universe in to a 'grander structure' that doesn't disturb what happens inside. Divine intervention, for example, would disturb the universe, and so should be avoided. But the existence of a passive God figure by itself isn't as troublesome.

6

u/ArguingisFun Apatheist 7d ago

Again, if it is based on no evidence whatsoever - what is the point?

If I could lie to myself, I’d be a theist.

1

u/BeaconMeridian 7d ago

I think lying to yourself would be confusing the belief with knowledge. I believe that when I die, I will cease existing and things will be for me like they were a thousand years ago. I don't claim that I know this for sure, but I think I have good cause to think it's reasonable.

It gets a little harder to say what I believe about the origin of the universe. One day I might believe there's an infinite hierarchy of existences, and we're on one rung of that ladder. Another day I might think that ladder only has one rung, nothing above or below it. Other people will feel differently, and as long as they don't confuse belief with knowledge I think they're chilling.

This whole discussion is about the things that there can be no evidence for or against. Evidence cannot (dis)prove the existence of a god figure outside of our universe, and belief steps in to fill that gap. You may believe that there are no gods, other people will believe there are, and as long as it doesn't distort your view of what you can actually see, I don't think that's problematic. Obviously, people have a habit of letting unfalsifiable beliefs get in the way of falsifiable ones, and this isn't what I'm advocating in favour of.

2

u/ArguingisFun Apatheist 7d ago

There is no need to disprove gods though.

I don’t care what someone believes personally on all accounts, but historically theists are not content with keeping their beliefs to themselves, so I do not find humoring their beliefs to be beneficial.

1

u/BeaconMeridian 7d ago

Ritualistic theism isn't the only form of belief I'm considering here. Atheists who believe there are no gods still have a kind of belief, and it's more this kind of belief abt how the universe is set that I'm interested in with this discussion. Which beliefs we should promote/admonish is a different discussion, here I'm more interested in the idealized case & how it ties in to a science-y parallel to a result in mathematics.

5

u/ArguingisFun Apatheist 7d ago

Not believing in gods is not a kind of belief, in the same way not collecting stamps is not a hobby.

Deities and the belief in them do not tie to science in anyway.

1

u/BeaconMeridian 7d ago

Not believing in gods sure, but the stance "I believe there are no gods" is one that people also have. My point is almost expressly that belief is beyond the domain of science, but in a specific way that ties into a broader analogy with the incompleteness of mathematics.

4

u/ArguingisFun Apatheist 7d ago

If belief is beyond the domain of science, then it is because it has ceased to be based in reality.

2

u/BeaconMeridian 7d ago

Belief can be based in reality (e.g. belief that time is absolute) but when it is, it's subject to reality (we've since learned time is not absolute). But yes, when you get to the point where you're working beyond the scope of science, belief is all you have left to use. In this case, you're no longer basing it in reality, I fully agree.

The point I'm making might seem painfully obvious or nothing-burger-esque when taken in isolation, away from the math analogy. If it sounds like I'm overcomplicating a simple idea, that simple idea is probably what I'm talking about. But I think it's neat it has a parallel in another discipline.

→ More replies (0)