How Critical Thinkers Lose Their Faith in God

[Shadow Link]

But when did religion ever include "careful consideration" or critical thinking?

Indoctrination, propaganda, social pressure, yes, but critical thinking? That was usually labeled heresy and actively discouraged.

Religion itself acknowledges being faith based. Faith, by definition, has no foundation. It's a system built on sand. I suspect an awareness of this vulnerability, conscious or unconscious. is what motivates religion's exquisit sensitivity to criticism and often rabid attacks on science and reason.

Apparently around the time of Cicero.

 

[Socratic Berean]

But when did religion ever include "careful consideration" or critical thinking?

Indoctrination, propaganda, social pressure, yes, but critical thinking? That was usually labeled heresy and actively discouraged.

Religion itself acknowledges being faith based. Faith, by definition, has no foundation. It's a system built on sand. I suspect an awareness of this vulnerability, conscious or unconscious. is what motivates religion's exquisit sensitivity to criticism and often rabid attacks on science and reason.

"Faith-based" is not "faith-exclusive." Blind faith is a subset of faith, but does not define it. I have faith--based on observations over time--that my car will propel me through space at high speeds and still safely deliver me to work each day, though I have little understanding of how its engine works or what the mechanics do to keep it operable.

The Bible encourages the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom; Paul lifts up--and uses as a role model--the Bereans for not just accepting his word blindly, but for testing his message by scouring their sources. There are plenty of contributions to science by persons of faith. (The father of genetics, Gregor Mendel, was an Augustine friar and abbot, and is only one example among many through time.)

 

[Valjean]

Yeah, I can see the problem. Any inductive conclusions can be said to be faith based, but there's a pretty big confidence gap between the Sun coming up tomorrow and the Irish sweepstakes.
Still, I find most religious doctrine tends to fall on the sweepstakes dide of the equation.

 

[Socratic Berean]

Yeah, I can see the problem. Any inductive conclusions can be said to be faith based, but there's a pretty big confidence gap between the Sun coming up tomorrow and the Irish sweepstakes.
Still, I find most religious doctrine tends to fall on the sweepstakes dide of the equation.

A gamble? Perhaps. Pascal would say the odds are more in your favor, but the consequences are much more significant than a jackpot payout. (Pascal's Wager, Pensees, 1670)

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

That couldn't be further from the truth or what I said. I'd encourage you to look into their cases. Most of them set out with the purpose of disproving scripture or the existence of God, and ended up in a very different place.

Pardon me if I doubt that very much. I have looked into supposed "atheists being converted". None were actually atheists-- they were simply people with lots of doubts, but still possessing some faith. That's still a theist...

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

If the many examples I listed are not enough to begin with, there are many more out there. A simple Google search will surface plenty of material, but several of these people have also documented their journey in books.

You listed "examples"? No-- you alluded to "examples". But you never actually provided any actual evidence.

Classic Dodge: when asked for "evidence", theists never-EVER produce any.

 

[Socratic Berean]

Pardon me if I doubt that very much. I have looked into supposed "atheists being converted". None were actually atheists-- they were simply people with lots of doubts, but still possessing some faith. That's still a theist...

I appreciate healthy skepticism. Dismissing an opportunity to learn out of doubt is harder to understand. Are you wholly unfamiliar with the early work and reputation of Anthony Flew, a world-reknowned atheist famous for his public advocacy of atheism and later the subject of "How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed his Mind (2007)?"

 

[Socratic Berean]

You listed "examples"? No-- you alluded to "examples". But you never actually provided any actual evidence.

Classic Dodge: when asked for "evidence", theists never-EVER produce any.

I am a little puzzled by your characterization as "alluding to 'examples" of my identification of numerous and varied case studies (the names and professions of the types of people we are discussing, noting there is much of the information you claim to be seeking on the Internet and that many of these people have written books containing, again, the information in which you claim interest). Are you having difficulty surfacing anything on these cases or do you need even more cases to get started?

(You may be interested to know that your "never-ever" argument in your conclusion is a type of inversion/derivative of the No True Scottsman fallacy in logic that was first described by Dr. Antony Flew, a world-famous atheist and advocate of atheist thought who later became a Christian...one of the many case studies that I pointed you toward.)

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I appreciate healthy skepticism. Dismissing an opportunity to learn out of doubt is harder to understand. Are you wholly unfamiliar with the early work and reputation of Anthony Flew, a world-reknowned atheist famous for his public advocacy of atheism and later the subject of "How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed his Mind (2007)?"

Flew developed severe illness, which was the direct cause to his "conversion".

Which isn't a very good argument in your favor-- why is it, people must be deeply emotional in some way (usually not in a good way) before they become "convinced" that "god is the answer" or something.

Never-ever when people are of sound mind and thinking rationally.

Why is that?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I am a little puzzled by your characterization as "alluding to 'examples" of my identification of numerous and varied case studies (the names and professions of the types of people we are discussing, noting there is much of the information you claim to be seeking on the Internet and that many of these people have written books containing, again, the information in which you claim interest). Are you having difficulty surfacing anything on these cases or do you need even more cases to get started?

(You may be interested to know that your "never-ever" argument in your conclusion is a type of inversion/derivative of the No True Scottsman fallacy in logic that was first described by Dr. Antony Flew, a world-famous atheist and advocate of atheist thought who later became a Christian...one of the many case studies that I pointed you toward.)

Nice little Red Herring you got there-- still no evidence [from you] that is supposedly so convincing that alleged "atheists" were allegedly "converted"....

And no-- it's not "no true scotsman if the observation is valid.

 

[Desert Snake]

Nice little Red Herring you got there-- still no evidence [from you] that is supposedly so convincing that alleged "atheists" were allegedly "converted"....

And no-- it's not "no true scotsman if the observation is valid.

Atheists don't tend to change faiths. It really doesn't mean much, neither do atheistic satanists, apparently. Some faiths have a higher conversion rate, they also have more members. Ever actually take a gander at a religious adherence chart?

 

[Socratic Berean]

Flew developed severe illness, which was the direct cause to his "conversion".

Which isn't a very good argument in your favor-- why is it, people must be deeply emotional in some way (usually not in a good way) before they become "convinced" that "god is the answer" or something.

Never-ever when people are of sound mind and thinking rationally.

Why is that?

Bob,
I'm not here to make any case in my favor; this is all about you. I continue to appreciate your healthy skepticism. If you are really interested in why so many staunch atheists, through a deep and reflective journey over time and after weighing the evidence, have taken a different path, you have an abundance of case studies to wade through. If you are really open to the phenomenon, I encourage you to start reading about the many examples that I listed. If you need more, ping me in a conversation.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Bob,
I'm not here to make any case in my favor; this is all about you. I continue to appreciate your healthy skepticism. If you are really interested in why so many staunch atheists, through a deep and reflective journey over time and after weighing the evidence, have taken a different path, you have an abundance of case studies to wade through. If you are really open to the phenomenon, I encourage you to start reading about the many examples that I listed. If you need more, ping me in a conversation.

I have yet to see an actual "staunch atheist" who converted while healthy of mind.

Which was my secondary point in your narrative.

I have read your "examples". None were of sound mind [when they "converted"], or else they were not actual atheists in the first place, never having lost faith in some sort of deity.

In any case, you did not even attempt to provide a link to your "lots of convincing evidence", not even so much as a single link.

Which was my main objection to your comment.

Theists have been asked for evidence that is convincing for thousands of years. So far, they always disseminate or worse-- try to quote from their claim (supposed holy book(s)).

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Bob,
I'm not here to make any case in my favor; this is all about you

Never said it was-- I simply object to your claim of "lots of evidence". I have yet to see any--and worse, the majority of theists don't even try. Just as you didn't.


However, in the final analysis? Your obviously flawed claim of "lots of staunch atheists converted to theism" is two logical fallacies: Argument from Authority, and Argument from Popularity.

Neither are valid reasons to support claim of god or gods.

 

[Socratic Berean]

Never said it was-- I simply object to your claim of "lots of evidence".

I don't know about lots of "evidence," but I have simply given you a list of real life case studies (and there are many more...just Google the issue). If you are not interested in reading the books and articles these men and women have used to articulate their story, so be it, but I am puzzled by your continued mischaracterization of their stories and your efforts to lump them all together.

However, in the final analysis? Your obviously flawed claim of "lots of staunch atheists converted to theism" is two logical fallacies: Argument from Authority, and Argument from Popularity.

Neither are valid reasons to support claim of god or gods.

There is no effort (or need) to rely on authority or popularity defenses here. My argument has very simply been that there are plenty of atheist converts and, for those interested in really exploring the issue, I provided a short list of names and professions. Saying that my use of these defenses (which, again I haven't done) to "support claim of God or gods," is doubly puzzling, given that I haven't made any claims about any deity. Again, my observation was that many atheists have walked away from their position, and my support was a list of real life examples. I'm not sure where all the confusion is coming from.

You seem to be just arguing for the sake of arguing, but here's a link that provides a few more examples and walks through 8 documented reasons that have played into atheists decisions to become non-atheist:

Why Atheists Change Their Mind: 8 Common Factors | Word on Fire

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Again, my observation was that many atheists have walked away from their position, and my support was a list of real life examples. I'm not sure where all the confusion is coming from.

An observation that isn't born up with close examination of the individual cases you cited.

And you did not cite very many-- I suppose the word "many" can apply to "more than one" in this instance.

Some could consider that a wee bit disingenuous on your part.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Why Atheists Change Their Mind: 8 Common Factors | Word on Fire

Sure, sure. List a website with an Agenda. I'll give it a look--but in the past, I've found 100% of these sites are less than honest (to be kind-- the majority are deliberately false).

But in the final analysis? 100% of your "example" falls into two logical fallacies, as I pointed out earlier.

And I still have yet to see this "lots of evidence" you claim was responsible for their "de-conversion".

Of course-- most of your examples were "No True Scotsman" as well-- in that they never lost faith in god(s).

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Why Atheists Change Their Mind: 8 Common Factors | Word on Fire

Ooooookaaaaay... So I read the "8 common"...

Some of the "evidences" are:

# Argument from Authority logical fallacy (this "holy" book says X, so it must be true. This ancient philosopher argues X, so it must be true. I just can't figure out the universe, but X who is Amazeballs, so I'll believe what X said)

# Argument from Popularity/Bandwagon logical fallacy (so many christians believe, so there must be something. why would anyone believe, if there was't reason to do so-- so I must too)

# Argument from Incredulity logical fallacy (the universe is so beautiful--therefore god! We don't know how we came here, therefore, god. Humans are complicated--therefore god)

# Argument from Emotional Appeal (I feel so X whenever I meditate/pray/do rituals/gather with a buncha other emotionally-charged people... )

# Argument from Childhood Indoctrination (I'm an "atheist" now--in that I don't go to church/pray/whatever, but looking back at my childhood/neighborhood/best-friends' religion it now makes sense)

This is incomplete, but it summarizes the "8 reasons" pretty well.

I am not convinced.

 

[1robin]

How Critical Thinkers Lose Their Faith in God

An old, but thought-provoking, article. Please discuss.

Probably the same way the worlds greatest critical thinkers gain it everyday. They are both superficial when it comes to real faith. As the bible states true faith has deep roots and does not change it's stance with every new direction the wind blows.

 

[Socratic Berean]

Ooooookaaaaay...

Bob - Your passion for arguing is impressive. You may eventually run into a live former atheist, perhaps even here in the fora, who can help you understand better than I that these types of people do, indeed, exist and have followed different paths to their destination.

At this juncture, we are clearly talking past each other; I'll bow out. I hope you get a chance for an honest and thorough look at the real life stories I flagged for you. As I noted early on, they are fascinating, irrespective of where your position falls in the conversation. I wish you the best of luck on your journey.