Last week I shared in the Skepticule Facebook group an article from Unbelievable? about an atheist woman who had become a theist (specifically a Christian, since Unbelievable? is a branch of Premier, which is a Christian organisation). My objection to the article was mainly that it was entirely based on the erroneous idea that belief is a choice. There followed this exchange (my comments in black, DWM's in blue):
David Ward Miller
Belief is not a choice?
Disbelief is not a choice?
Atheists who belief and Christians who disbelieve are not making a choice?
Is this a reference to no free will?
Please clarify, thx.
Paul S Jenkins
Author
Admin
David Ward Miller
Can you choose to believe that two plus two equals five? Can you choose
to believe the Moon is made of cream cheese? If you claim to believe
something is true, or to believe that some specific thing exists, you
are basing your belief on your experience related to that thing. I
cannot look at a red tomato and choose to believe that it is, in fact, a
purple pineapple.
Free
will — or its lack — doesn't come into this. As an atheist I don't have
a choice whether I believe in any deity. My disbelief in God is based
on my epistemology — on how I can know things are true or not true. I
don't claim that there are no gods, only that I have so far found no
reason to believe that there are any. If I came across a reason that was
sufficiently convincing, I would have no choice but to believe.
Some
people may have a 'gut feeling' that something is true — others may be
justifiably skeptical of the gut's reliability. When describing what and
how they believe, some people resort to extensive use of metaphor (the
article linked in the OP is an example of this). Metaphors are fine,
until those using them mistake the metaphors for reality. The map is not
the territory.
David Ward Miller
That
was a lot of words to say you made the choice to believe there is no
evidence for God. The highly intelligent atheist (at least equal to
your intelligence) took a deep dive in the evidence and came to be a
theist.
Paul S Jenkins
Author
Admin
David Ward Miller May I suggest you re-read my comment?
I
did not make a choice to believe there is no evidence for God. I
haven't stated there's no evidence for God. What I stated was: "I don't
claim that there are no gods, only that I have so far found no reason to
believe that there are any." I didn't choose to find no reason to
believe. Indeed I stated that if I found convincing evidence I would
have no choice but to believe. The fact that this former atheist (in the
article) apparently found some evidence to believe is of very little
use to me, since that evidence either wasn't presented, or wasn't
evidence.
Clearly you think that belief is a choice. I don't, and as requested I've attempted to clarify why.
David Ward Miller
Thx for responding.
//Indeed
I stated that if I found convincing evidence I would have no choice but
to believe. The fact that this former atheist (in the article)
apparently found some evidence to believe is of very little use to me,
since that evidence either wasn't presented, or wasn't evidence.//
I
think you make my point. You would make a choice if the evidence was
compelling to you. It is not. For her it is compelling so she choose to
believe. You have “chosen” to reject that evidence as is not
compelling to you. You made a choice to not accept that evidence while
she did.
—You believe the evidence supports naturalism world view without any deity. A choice.
—She believes the evidence supports a theistic world view, changing her mind from atheism. A choice.
—Other
Christian’s look at the evidence and deconstruct believe there is
insufficient reason to believe in any deity so believe the universe has
no Creator or Designer deity. A choice.
Beliefs are a choice.
Paul S Jenkins
Author
Admin
I
think we are differing on our understanding of the word 'belief', and
it may only be a matter of degree. My understanding is that a belief is
the acceptance or acknowledgement that a statement is true, i.e. that it
aligns with reality, with how things actually are, rather than aligning
solely with, for example, speculation or hypothesis. Incidentally such a
belief might be true, but if it's a belief not based on evidence it is
therefore not justified, and therefore cannot be counted as knowledge.
One
can choose one's standards of evidence, in the sense of deciding that
certain criteria have to be satisfied in order to accept that something
is true or is likely to be true, but that's a choice of standards, not a
choice of belief. Belief comes automatically once those criteria are
satisfied. If they are not satisfied, then for me no amount of
'choosing' will result in belief. This is why I say that I don't believe
in the existence of any gods. Not because I actively believe that there
are no gods, but because my criteria have yet to be satisfied.
David Ward Miller
Perhaps it’s a difference in semantics.
You now say your standards for compelling evidence are better than hers—no god(s).
She says her standards are better than yours—God.
Both choices.
By your definition of belief you attempt to avoid it and those who disagree with you do believe.
It
seems you do actively believe there is no deity. You even passionately
fight for that belief. I respect that too. But you made a choice in
your “belief” there is no deity.
What
you believe in—your world view—excludes any deity. That belief of what
you deem as true is a personal choice in my opinion. Her world view
includes God and is a choice as she changed her opinion.
Choice is the issue here.
Paul S Jenkins
Author
Admin
"You now say your standards for compelling evidence are better than hers—no god(s)."
I haven't said this. Nor do I know what her standards are — the article doesn't state them.
"It seems you do actively believe there is no deity."
This
is the exact opposite of what I thought I stated — to be clear, I do
not actively believe there are no gods. I am merely reserving belief
until my evidential criteria are satisfied.
As
for "passionately fighting" for my belief, I merely stated that belief
is not a choice, and in response to your first comment I explained why.
And my worldview doesn't actively exclude anything — it's open to
anything that meets my standards of evidence for its existence. It's
true that I've chosen those standards based on my understanding of their
validity, but my belief in the truth-value of anything that is tested
against them is dependent on the result of that test, independent of
choice.
David Ward Miller
So the standards of evidence for what we believe is a choice, not the belief that results from those standards?
What do you believe based upon whatever?
Are those beliefs not then a choice?
What does she believe based upon whatever?
Are those beliefs not then a choice?
Paul S Jenkins
Author
Admin
"So the standards of evidence for what we believe is a choice, not the belief that results from those standards?"
That's
how I see it. If a belief is the result of something else (in this case
'standards of evidence') that same belief can't also be a direct result
of choice. Therefore belief itself is not a choice. Which is why I
can't choose to believe what the Moon is made of. I can, however, choose
to accept certain standards of evidence, and if evidence meeting those
standards convincingly suggests that the Moon is not made of cream
cheese I have no choice but to believe it.
If
you're extending the idea of 'choice' to cover absolutely everything we
do, then I suppose you could legitimately maintain that belief is a
choice, because everything in that scenario is a choice, by definition.
But then choice becomes a meaningless concept because it fails to
distinguish anything from anything else.
David Ward Miller
Is
is fair to say you believe your standards of evidence are valid and
believe her standards are not valid or insufficient. I’m not addressing
the specific standards, just the comparison.
So
you both can look at the same evidence and interpret it differently
based upon your interpretation which is based upon “standards”?
Paul S Jenkins
Author
Admin
"So
you both can look at the same evidence and interpret it differently
based upon your interpretation which is based upon “standards”?"
Standards
of evidence, yes. But belief itself is not an act of will. I don't
choose to believe one way or the other — what I believe is the result of
what evidence I accept as valid.
David Ward Miller
I’m on the road… will ponder this.
Posts
