Word of the Day: Shermer’s Law

Christianity and atheism clash againI propose “Shermer’s Law” for this observation by Michael Shermer: “Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons.”1

This observation makes an important distinction between (1) how someone came to their beliefs and (2) how they later defend those beliefs.  People often come to their beliefs for poor reasons—for example, they may be racist or religious simply because they were raised in that environment.

Few will admit as an adult, “Oh, yeah—I don’t believe that for any better reason than that I was steeped in that environment, and I’m now just an unthinking reflection of that environment.”  Instead, they use their intellect (much more formidable now that they’re an adult) to marshal a defense of their beliefs.  The belief comes first, and the defense comes after.  And this isn’t just to save face with an antagonist; it’s to save face with themselves.

We can come up with a defense for just about anything.  It may not be a very good defense, but it’s something, and it may be sufficient to avoid cognitive dissonance (“Surely I believe this for a good reason, right??”).  The smarter you are, the better the defense you will come up with.

All of us do this, and (this may be consolation) the smartest people can do it more spectacularly than the rest of us.  Isaac Newton wasted time in alchemy, Nobel laureate Linus Pauling in vitamin C research, and Nobel laureate William Shockley in eugenics.

No one’s immune, but this is common in Christians who cobble together rationalizations for their beliefs.  “In for a penny, in for a pound” is easier than taking a step back to soberly consider the logic of the beliefs.  And the smarter the Christian, the better they can defend groundless beliefs.

Try to uncover this by asking, “You’re giving me an argument for Christianity, but is this what convinced you?  If not, why don’t you give me the argument that made you a Christian?”

Photo credit: Wikimedia

1 Michael Shermer, Why People Believe Weird Things (Freeman, 2002), p. 283.

Related posts:

Related links:

The Christian Message

The Thinking Atheist has put together another high-quality and humbling video (humbling because this sets the bar very high for the rest of us trying to add to the discussion).

Here’s the Christian message told in a frank but sympathetic way (4:16).

An Atheist Ad Campaign—a Holiday Tradition!

Atheist ad campaign asks does god exist

Today, Seattle Atheists launches an ad campaign on local buses.  Twelve buses will carry banner ads with photos of four people in average settings with the tag line, “1 in 4 is an Atheist.”  The campaign runs through early January.

One in four Seattle residents has no god belief—in other words, they are atheists.  Seattleites may not consider that the person who sold them their morning coffee might have been an atheist.  Or the person who drove their bus or repaired their car or did their taxes or treated their illness.  Atheists are their coworkers, their friends, their family.  Whether they realize it or not, they know plenty of atheists.

These are smart people who take pride in their work and love their families and appreciate the great things about America, just like religious people.

The Problem.  While atheists do their part within society, they don’t always get the same consideration in return.  They’re sometimes told, “This is a Christian nation and if you don’t like it, move to Europe.”  Some risk their jobs by revealing who they are, and some risk ostracism and the loss of their family or community.  Some are bullied or discriminated against within schools or by the military.  Seeing this, many atheists remain silent.  Many churchgoers are among these silent atheists.

The political season is a time when atheists are particularly reminded how out of step they are with much of America.  The U.S. House recently passed a resolution to reassure us that, yes, “In God We Trust” is still our national motto.  Governors appeal for prayer to solve problems rather than using the power of their office.  Political candidates often vie with each other to be the most Christian.  When it comes to people we wouldn’t vote for, atheists are at the bottom.

What Atheists Want (and What They Don’t Want).  Many of the fears Christians have about atheists are invented by clergy or politicians.  American already is a secular nation—the Constitution makes this clear—but that’s not a threat to Christians.  Indeed, it’s the best environment for Christians.

Christians can send their children to public school and know that they won’t hear a Bahá’í or Satanist prayer.  Christians can go to a city council meeting and not see “Allahu Akbar” in Arabic script on the wall.  Christians can go into a courtroom and not see a Shinto or Hindu god of jurisprudence glaring down at him.  But while government is constrained in its religious speech, citizens are not, and Christians can still preach or hand out flyers in the public square.  Everyone wins.

Atheists don’t want Christians denied their right to free speech.  When atheists object to preachers recommending political candidates or “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, they don’t want to limit the rights of Christians or get special privileges, they just want equality.

Next Steps.  If you’re an atheist, consider coming out.  Politely make your presence known.  The biggest factor in the American public becoming more tolerant of homosexuals was simply knowing one, and it works the same way for atheists.  But whether or not you feel comfortable making your atheism public, find local atheist or freethought groups and connect with your community.

If you’re a theist, be aware that there are atheists all around you.  These are people just like you, honest and hardworking.  Instead of praying before a meeting, evangelizing in the workplace, or putting a Jesus fish on your web site, consider if actions like these may offend others.  Encourage your friends to speak their mind and be who they are.

Philosophical Grounding: A Parable

God's existence doesn't seem likely.  Why imagine that Jesus is real?Consider this parable:

A certain mathematician, in a philosophical mood one day, wonders what grounds his mathematics.  The math works, of course, but he wonders if he’s missing something foundational.

He consults a friend of his, a theologian.  The theologian knows almost nothing about mathematics, but he knows his Christianity.

The mathematician says, “Mathematics is like an inverted triangle with the most advanced math along the wide top edge.  The top layer is grounded on the math below it, which is grounded on what is below, and so on through the layers, down to arithmetic and logic at the point at the bottom.  And that’s where it stops.”

The theologian nods his head wisely.  “I see the problem—what does the bottom rest on?”

The mathematician was silent.

“In your view, it rests on nothing,” said the theologian.  “It just sits there in midair.  But the problem is easily resolved—mathematics and logic comes from God.  There’s your grounding.”

“Are you saying that I need to convert to Christianity to be a mathematician?”

“No, just realize that you are borrowing from the Christian worldview every time you make a computation or write an equation.”

Satisfied that this nagging problem has been resolved, the mathematician returns to his work and thinks no more of it. 

The End.

So, is the mathematician any better off?  Is he faster or more accurate or more creative?  Do his proofs work now where they hadn’t before?  In short, did he get anything of value from the whole episode?

I’ve heard this “grounding” or “atheists borrow from the Christian worldview” idea many times, but I’ve yet to discover what this missing thing is that is being borrowed.

“God did it” is simply a restatement of the problem.  “God did it” is precisely as useful as “logic and arithmetic are simply properties of our reality” or “that’s just the way it is” or even “I don’t know.”  A curious problem has been suppressed, not resolved.  In fact, the theologian himself has his answer resting in midair because he provides no reason to conclude that God exists.  His claim is no more believable than that of any other religion—that is, not at all.

The person who stops at “God did it” has stated an opinion only—an opinion with no evidence to back it up.  It doesn’t advance the cause of truth one bit.

Mathematics is tested, and it works.  Scratch your head about what grounds it if you want, but God is an unnecessary and unedifying addition to the mix.

Faith Shows the Emperor has No Clothes

The emperor parades around in public wearing his new (invisible) clothesSuppose a religion worshipped a god that didn’t exist.  How could it endure?  Wouldn’t it be immediately exposed as a fraud?

Not if it turned thinking on its head and argued that not reason but faith* is actually the proper way to look at the world, or at least the religious part of it.  Fellow believers would encourage this faith-trumps-reason worldview.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain and just have faith!

Defending an invisible God and celebrating faith is exactly what Christians would do if their religion were manmade.  Faith is always the last resort.  If there were convincing evidence, Christians would be celebrating that, not faith.

Augustine said, “Do not understand so you may believe; instead believe so you may understand.”  But why?  You don’t do that in any other area of life.  You don’t pick a belief system first and then select facts to support it; it’s the other way around.  You follow the facts where they lead.

Faith is permission to believe without good reason.  Believing something because it is reasonable and rational requires no faith at all.  If you don’t have enough evidence to cross an intellectual gulf to the belief on the other side, and if only faith will get you there, then don’t cross that gulf.

It’s a bizarre world where faith not only trumps reason but is celebrated since we use reason all the time to get through life.  Only by using reason and following the evidence—that is, rejecting beliefs built on faith—did we build the technology-filled world we live in today.

In fact, faith is the worst decision-making and analytical tool possible.  You don’t use faith to cross a busy street, or learn French, or treat malaria.  It provides no method for distinguishing between true and false propositions.  Faith doesn’t provide a reliable answer but simply encourages an end to questioning.  It’s even worse than guessing, because with a guess, you’re at least open to revisiting a decision in the face of new evidence.  Not so with faith.

No one relies on faith unless their god weren’t just invisible but was actually nonexistent.

Photo credit: Wikipedia

*By faith, I mean belief without sufficient evidence.  Christians might respond that their definition of faith is identical to that for trust: belief in accord with sufficient evidence.  In my experience, however, Christians use each of these definitions for faith, switching them as necessary.  If they only stuck to the idea that faith and trust were identical, that might clear up a lot of problems.

Related posts:

Map of World Religions

Everyone’s seen maps of world religions like this one.

Have you ever wondered why you never see a Map of World Science?

Let’s imagine such a map.  Over here is where scientists believe in a geocentric solar system, and over there, a heliocentric one.  This area is where they think that astrology can predict the future, and that area is where they reject the idea.  The Intelligent Design guys reign in the crosshatched area, and evolution in the dark gray area.

Naturally, each of these different groups think of their opponents as heretics, and they have fought wars over their opposing beliefs.  (To keep it manageable, I’ve shown on the map only the conflicts with more than 1000 deaths.)

Of course, the idea is nonsensical.  A new scientific theory isn’t culturally specific, and, if it passes muster, it peacefully sweeps the world.  Astronomy replaced astrology, chemistry replaced alchemy, and the germ theory replaced evil spirits as a cause of disease.  One scientist should get the same results from an experiment as another, regardless of their respective religions.  Evolution or germ theory or relativity or the Big Bang are part of the consensus view among scientists, whether they are Christian, Muslim, atheist, or Other.

Sure, there can be some not-invented-here thinking—scientists have egos, too—but this only slows the inevitable.  Contrast this with the idea that Shintoism will sweep across America over the next couple of decades and replace Christianity, simply because it’s a better idea.

Let’s go back to our map of world religions.  Religions claim to give answers to the big questions—answers that science can’t give.  Questions like: What is our purpose?  Or, Where did we come from?  Or, Is there anything else out there?  Or, What is science grounded on?

But the map shows that the religious answer to that question depends on where you are!  If you live in Tibet or Thailand, Buddhism teaches that we are here to learn to cease suffering and reach nirvana.  If you live in Yemen or Saudi Arabia, Islam teaches that we are here to submit to Allah.  We ask the most profound questions of all, and the answers are location specific?

What kind of truth depends on location?

For discovering reality, religion comes up short.  Next time someone nods his head sagely and says, “Ah, but Christianity can answer the Big Questions®,” remember how shallow that claim is.