Tuesday, January 08, 2008

100% Convinced?

No small few religious believers talk about their "doubt". They're not fanatics like those weirdos; they're not 100% certain of their beliefs; they admit they could be wrong.

Are these protestations meaningful? If so, in what sense?

A skeptic, such as myself, means something very specific about not being sure about some matter of truth: There are logically possible experimental results or other observations that, if they contradicted the theory, would entail modifying the theory. If a better, simpler theory were proffered, I would abandon the old theory altogether. If I drop a rock and it doesn't fall, something is wrong with the theory of gravity.

If religious belief means belief in some sort of religious truth, then what could change your mind? If you're convinced that your religion is true, then you believe that it's true regardless of your opinion; changing your opinions shouldn't change your conviction of truth.

Contrawise, if you could just arbitrarily change your mind about your religion, then your religion is a matter of your personal opinion and preference. In which case, by what virtue do you dignify your personal preferences with the name of "religion"?

Saying you might be mistaken is pure bullshit if there's nothing that could actually convince you that you were mistaken. And if you could just arbitrarily change your mind, you don't have a religion at all.

2 comments:

  1. Hello Larry it's just about that hour when steam pressure has dropped so low that the words are difficult.

    Relative in part to what you say here are two posts on my blog that need to be read as they were posted chronologically.

    Without further ado.
    "Brit blogger heading for the big house?" first then followed by the update "Guided by the hand of god."

    Doozy, stroll on, and cor blimey are totally and unequivocally inadequate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brit Blogger Bound For Big House?
    Guided By The Hand Of God.

    Speaking of His Noodly Appendage, this NSFW post is delightfully perverted. I suspect at least one of His Appendages here is not quite as noodly as usual.

    ReplyDelete

Please pick a handle or moniker for your comment. It's much easier to address someone by a name or pseudonym than simply "hey you". I have the option of requiring a "hard" identity, but I don't want to turn that on... yet.

With few exceptions, I will not respond or reply to anonymous comments, and I may delete them. I keep a copy of all comments; if you want the text of your comment to repost with something vaguely resembling an identity, email me.

No spam, pr0n, commercial advertising, insanity, lies, repetition or off-topic comments. Creationists, Global Warming deniers, anti-vaxers, Randians, and Libertarians are automatically presumed to be idiots; Christians and Muslims might get the benefit of the doubt, if I'm in a good mood.

See the Debate Flowchart for some basic rules.

Sourced factual corrections are always published and acknowledged.

I will respond or not respond to comments as the mood takes me. See my latest comment policy for details. I am not a pseudonomous-American: my real name is Larry.

Comments may be moderated from time to time. When I do moderate comments, anonymous comments are far more likely to be rejected.

I've already answered some typical comments.

I have jqMath enabled for the blog. If you have a dollar sign (\$) in your comment, put a \\ in front of it: \\\$, unless you want to include a formula in your comment.