Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
American Enterprise Institute: Tim Tebow and the Atheist's Dilemma
Oh, bruddah.
http://www.american.com/archive/2012/january/tim-tebow-and-the-atheists-dilemma
Silverman’s argument could easily be made by someone who actually believes that there is a “Creator of all that.” Indeed, in the history of Western thought, there have been a number of philosophers who firmly believed in God the Creator, but did not think that their august God could possibly be interested in such a trivial matter as a football game. The great theistic philosophers Leibniz, Newton, and Malebranche would have seen eye to eye with Silverman on this point. But Silverman, as an atheist, is not making the argument that God does not concern himself with such minutiae. Instead, he is saying if there were a God, He would not stoop to involve himself with the outcome of forward passes. This statement is true only if we accept Silverman’s concept of God. But if Silverman is assuming that his concept of God is the only concept in town, he is simply and quite badly misinformed. Which brings us to the atheist’s dilemma.
When an atheist says, “I don’t believe in God,” he must first define the God in which (or in whom) he is not believing, i.e., the God he has in mind when he denies His existence. Prominent atheists are fond of saying that they don’t believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, elves, or God. But the difficulty with this approach should be quite obvious. We all agree on what Santa Claus would be like if he existed; ditto for elves and the Easter Bunny. They are very well defined imaginary objects, like Sherlock Holmes or Hamlet.
We all have the same concept of Santa Claus, but do we all have the same concept of God? Not in the least. Mormons believe that God has a body and a wife and that what God once was we one day will be. In sharp contrast, the Greek philosopher Aristotle believed that God was pure thought, blissfully unaware of the contemptible universe that aspired to approach His perfection. The great iconoclast philosopher Spinoza believed that God was the totality of all that is and that everything was perfect. Leibniz, who strived to refute Spinoza, believed that God was the Supreme Monad (whatever that means) who created the best of all possible worlds, but certainly not a perfect world. The French deists, like Voltaire, imagined their God to be a celestial engineer who constructed our universe and then left it to go its own way. St. Thomas Aquinas believed that God was immutable—what is perfect cannot change except by becoming imperfect, and thus God could not change. Alfred North Whitehead, in contrast, argued for a God that was in process, always representing the possible best Being at any given state of the universe. On a less intellectually exalted scale, there are those who think that God is an old man with a long white beard who sits on a golden throne floating somewhere above the stars. Or a witty old codger smoking a fat cigar, like George Burns.
When an atheist says he doesn’t believe in God, which God is he talking about? Obviously, he can only reject the idea of God that he has in his own mind—or, more likely, the various ideas and concepts of God that he has encountered. But how can he know for sure that he has encountered every possible conception of God? It is easy, as we have seen, to make up our mind about the existence of Santa Claus. But God is much trickier. For how is it possible to be certain that you would reject every possible candidate for Godhood until you have thought about them all—and even then, how can you ever know that you have thought about them all, even if you had spent your entire life reading every work of philosophy or theology that touched on the subject? What about the concepts of God that are still waiting in the wings of time?
When an atheist says, “I don’t believe in God,” he must first define the God in which (or in whom) he is not believing, i.e., the God he has in mind when he denies His existence. Prominent atheists are fond of saying that they don’t believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, elves, or God. But the difficulty with this approach should be quite obvious. We all agree on what Santa Claus would be like if he existed; ditto for elves and the Easter Bunny. They are very well defined imaginary objects, like Sherlock Holmes or Hamlet.
We all have the same concept of Santa Claus, but do we all have the same concept of God? Not in the least. Mormons believe that God has a body and a wife and that what God once was we one day will be. In sharp contrast, the Greek philosopher Aristotle believed that God was pure thought, blissfully unaware of the contemptible universe that aspired to approach His perfection. The great iconoclast philosopher Spinoza believed that God was the totality of all that is and that everything was perfect. Leibniz, who strived to refute Spinoza, believed that God was the Supreme Monad (whatever that means) who created the best of all possible worlds, but certainly not a perfect world. The French deists, like Voltaire, imagined their God to be a celestial engineer who constructed our universe and then left it to go its own way. St. Thomas Aquinas believed that God was immutable—what is perfect cannot change except by becoming imperfect, and thus God could not change. Alfred North Whitehead, in contrast, argued for a God that was in process, always representing the possible best Being at any given state of the universe. On a less intellectually exalted scale, there are those who think that God is an old man with a long white beard who sits on a golden throne floating somewhere above the stars. Or a witty old codger smoking a fat cigar, like George Burns.
When an atheist says he doesn’t believe in God, which God is he talking about? Obviously, he can only reject the idea of God that he has in his own mind—or, more likely, the various ideas and concepts of God that he has encountered. But how can he know for sure that he has encountered every possible conception of God? It is easy, as we have seen, to make up our mind about the existence of Santa Claus. But God is much trickier. For how is it possible to be certain that you would reject every possible candidate for Godhood until you have thought about them all—and even then, how can you ever know that you have thought about them all, even if you had spent your entire life reading every work of philosophy or theology that touched on the subject? What about the concepts of God that are still waiting in the wings of time?
The same thing goes for a monotheist, of course. How could a believer in Jesus know that his God was the only real God unless he or she had thought about them all, past, present, and future? The "atheist's dilemma" collapses easily into the monotheist's as well.
And Tim Burton would beg to differ on this supposed uniformity of belief in Santa, for one...
11 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
From a missionary in the Czech Republic, 2004:
Since coming here, I have become increasing dissatisfied with the concept of Santa Claus. The Czechs have a day for Saint Nicholas (a real historical Saint who despite modern American folklore did not live in the North Pole or wear red. Actually, he lived in Turkey in the 12th Century). For all the faults Santa Claus has, at least we can poke fun of him for what he is – a tool of modern corporate America.
Czech Christmas means that a flying invisible Baby Jesus delivers presents. Czech children have a similar feeling of letdown upon discovering that it is actually not Baby Jesus but Mom and Pop who are putting the presents under the tree. The result is that I can read journals from my students that say "I believed in Jesus as a child" in the same way an American lad might bashfully remember believing in Santa Claus.
So if I tell Czechs I am a Christian, it is not something that smacks of intelligence to them. At worst, I am mocked in the way one might mock an adult who insisted on Santa Claus existing. At best, I may receive a pained expression of wanting to believe but wondering "how in the world do I believe in Santa Claus all over again, only this time as a personal God?"
http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/08/05/czech-republic-missionaries-having-trouble.htm
That's why atheism is not a "rejection" of God, but a lack of belief.
It's very easy to lack belief in every possible conception of God, including ones you've never heard of. Just like it's possible for you to have lacked belief in the red-and-blue striped monkeys that live in our asteroid belt and offer the power of invisibility to anyone who worships them by burning cauliflower as a sacrifice...even though you've never heard of them until just now.
"Letting Go of God" was a great travelogue covering her trip from Catholicism to atheism. With occasional detours down the twisty paths of New Age and woo:
In my confusion I found someone who made it clear. Someone who had thought about this topic a lot.
Now at this point I knew a little bit of science but not a lot, and that made me the perfect candidate for Deepak Chopra.
I was so intrigued with this quantum mechanics that Deepak refers to over and over and over again in his books, that I decided to take a class in it.
And what I found is - Deepak Chopra is full of shit!
