On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But I think what they mean is that it requires as much faith to be absolutely sure
>there is no "higher power" as it does to be absolutely sure there is.
>
> But then we've had this discussion before, n'est pas?
A-yup. I think that in this particular test, the tension arose from the
following conflict: if it's within the realms of purely rational
judgement to conclude by virtue of the lack of evidence that fairies and
unicorns don't exist, then why is judging by a similar lack of evidence
that God doesn't exist an act of faith, whereas in the less controversial
cases it was just a rational judgement?
Based on my observance of myself and others, I think there are really two
kinds of atheism. Type 1 Atheism goes something like this: "If lack of
evidence leads me to disbelieve in Quetzocoatl and Zeus and Ishtar, then
by that same reasoning I disbelieve in Jesus, the prophets, and the
saints. Cool!" Type 1 atheism is a rational judgement. Type 2 Atheism
sounds more like this, "I just can't bring myself to believe in the
teachings of my church--or any church--anymore. Is there a God? There's
no evidence. I can't bring myself to believe him Him anymore. I wish I
could, but I can't." The Type 2 Atheist is depending on faith because he
is beset by doubt, just as most religious believers are beset by doubts of
their own.
So, some atheists must exert their will to disbelieve in God, whereas
other atheists might just say, "Heh, what's to believe in the first
place?"
Marvin Long
Austin, Texas
My hero is Guy Forsyth! www.guyforsyth.com
"The ego that sees a 'thou' is fundamentally different from an ego that
sees an 'it.'" -- Joseph Campbell
