This week’s question: Why can’t atheists be more open-minded about God?
The concept of “closed-mindedness” is often ascribed to those who value science over easier or less closely examined explanations for natural phenomena — those who are willing to dismiss the supernatural or pseudo-scientific upon presentation. The logic of the question is flawed, and it is oddly asked of those who are usually more open-minded than those leveling the accusation of “closed-mindedness.” Science requires an open mind and a willingness to accept new ideas for any sort of development or growth. The very process of scientific inquiry requires a strong filter through which to observe reality.
By observing an unexplained event and labeling it supernatural, one is likely making invalid connections and too readily eliminating countless other possible logical explanations. This is the definition of closed-mindedness. Belief in the divine or supernatural is often accompanied by personal stories of an experience that cannot be explained and must, therefore, be supernatural. If an experience cannot be explained, this does not strengthen the argument for the supernatural in any way. The believer is contradicting him/herself by saying that they are able to explain the unexplainable, for that is all the unexplained is — unexplained phenomena. There is a marked difference in the acceptance or proposal of supernatural or superstitious concepts and the discounting of them due to a lack of evidence. Acceptance of a concept without any justification discounts any future evidence that could be presented and more accurately represents closed-mindedness..
Cameron Moody is a second-year computational biology major.
Open-mindedness, or the willingness to entertain new ideas, is a crucial element of critical thought. There can be no greater failing in the rational mind than to refuse to listen to something new simply because it does not line up with what one already believes to be true. The misconception that atheism is “closed-minded” exists because many atheists (myself included) realize that eventually, one must stop merely entertaining and begin evaluating.
For example, imagine that a traveling salesman comes to town and claims to be able to offer your ancestors expedited entry into Heaven — he can help Granny cut St. Peter’s line. The rational person’s response is to first entertain the idea. After all, if the salesman is telling the truth, there is much to be gained, because we buried Granny without her walker and it’s a long and tiring line. But in order to move from entertaining to accepting the idea, the rational person must demand some proof. After all, what if there are two salesmen that both claim this ability? What if there are a thousand?
Not giving this lying jerk your money is not “closed-minded,” but a rational evaluation of a wild claim. We are all presented throughout our lives with thousands of claims by thousands of religious salesmen, and we fend them all off to some degree. As Stephen Roberts said, “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.”
Connor Oakes is a third-year political science major.
A study from the Pew Forum found that atheists and the non-religious were more knowledgeable about Christianity and other world religions than any other religious group. Indeed, atheists know more about different religions in general, at least when compared to other religious groups. How much do you know about the beliefs of others? Are you open-minded about other gods aside from your own?
I’d say we are so open-minded that we perceive all claims relating to the supernatural to be equal, as each one claims to have the ultimate proof of its claims. Miracles, science revealed in holy texts, premonitions, “truth,” reward and punishment — they are all present in one form or another in every religious text or dogma. This leads me to a position where I have to reject some claims, but any grounds for rejecting one supernatural claim is grounds for rejecting many others.
I therefore simply withhold judgment. I am open to be convinced into believing any supernatural claim, but for now I will live my life the way I wish to live it, employing the best humanity has to offer in philosophy, science or reason, to pursue whatever I decide is worthwhile. I reserve the freedom to change my mind or change the way I live at any time.
David Urzua is a fifth-year philosophy major.
Good article! Open-mindedness is not the ability to accept any idea. It is the ability to entrain any idea, and reject it if the argument for it is insufficient.
another example of backwards thinking by the liberals. how can you be open minded if you just go with what they teach you in public schools about jesus being a lie and evolution? i’ve met a lot of athiests (or maybe aTHINKests) and nobody ever gave me a good explanation for why they would throw away their chance at heaven. HELLO?! what about the chance that youre wrong? is it worth an eternity in hell just to avoid being moral? but im sure you dumbocrats are far too wrapped up in this liberal think tank of a school to even… Read more »
You’re looking for a reason why people would ‘throw away’ their chance at heaven, but you seem to have failed to provide an explanation as to why you think heaven exists. Where’s the proof? Are you really going to spend your life deluding yourself? Well, good luck to you.
the bible has been proven to be historically accurate, but it doesn’t even matter because the universe itself points to a creator, the way everything turned out just right for us. and even then it doesn’t matter again because it’s a matter of faith. that’s three layers of explanation right there, sweetie.
good luck to you too. for your sake i hope youre right and we just go back to darwin’s evolutionary vortex when we die, because otherwise eternity will be pretty hot
No, it has not. And the universe does not point to a creator. If you actually looked at the universe you would see it’s actually not really “intelligently” made. Where do you get your facts from? Those loons from Answers in Genesis?
Whoever told you the bible is historically accurate lied to you. If not, prove it.
Also, everything turned out just right for us? What about earthquakes, hurricanes, and cancer? That’s perfect for us?
And all you need is faith to believe in something? Really? Well then I believe that leprechauns are going to take over the world in the future so I’m going to start painting everything green to please them. Proof? I have none, only faith. You should, too, because all you need is faith.
just do a few of them Google searches on the subject and you will learn alot. theres alot of information if you will have an open mind. but i see youre just joking around so this will probably go nowhere. funny though. leprecauhns? LOL im going to go paint myself green & ill let you know how it goes
I wasn’t joking around. I was illustrating how faith alone does not prove or provide evidence of anything, and your faith in your god is no different from somebody else’s faith in leprechauns. And no, google searches that result in Catholic websites will do nothing. I could take ANY book, compare it to 2,000 years of history, and find similarities between that book and actual events. Heck, if I made a list of 50 predictions for the future, I’m sure most of them will be close to actual events 2,000 years from now. That is not proof that I am… Read more »
the pagan religions and gods don’t give you a robust morality like Christianity does. that’s why you see so many problems with the violence in the middle east or the communism in china. also you can see that nations that tend towards athiesm use evolution as an excuse to genocide, like germany or russia in WWII.
so i suppose if the other religions are right it doesnt matter to me. why would i be a muslim if i would go to hell for not abusing women enough or eating ham or something? LOL
Except the Nazis did what they did because they were Christian. And Josef Stalin had people killed for not following his politics, not for being atheists. No one has ever been killed in the name of ‘No God’. No one. Ever. Seriously. And that ‘robust mentality’ you’re throwing around is responsible for *at least* the torture, murder, rape and enslavement of thousands of people – and that’s only if the stuff in the Bible is true, because God directed a *lot* of those things in Deuteronomy, and Moses led the Israelites on what was basically a massive slaughterfest around the… Read more »
the people who did those things were not true Christians, and they will definitely burn in hell if they never repented for using Christianity as a shield to commit atrocities
The ‘no true Scotsman’ fallacy? Really? Come on, man. You and I both know they would be saying exactly the same thing about any Christian who disgareed with them, and that those Christians would burn in hell for denying the truth of the Bible’s support for what they did.
The sad part is that they’re right. The Bible does call for the murder and enslavement of non-Christians. It’s all over the Old Testament – and Jesus is documented all over the New Testament as saying Scripture should be followed without exception.
you cant cherry-pick passages from the Bible without context. just look at how Jesus lived (peacefully, turning the other cheek, showing mercy to the undeserving, etc)
And inventing Hell. He was the first person ever to mention it, after all. And that’s my point. These violent Christians are the ones who *aren’t* cherry-picking. They’re also paying attention to the parts of the Bible that encourage murder, rape and slavery. Those parts came before Jesus, after all. They’re perfectly nice to each other, they love their neighbor – because their neighbor, broadly speaking, is usually the same kind of Christian – but if you read the Bible without cherry-picking the nice parts from it, you find that it’s actually a very, very long-winded threat with a promise… Read more »
Even if a nation somehow used evolution as an excuse for genocide, it still doesn’t negate the fact that evolution occurs in nature.
Interesting fact: there’s nothing showing anything close to proof that any genocide, ever, has been perpetrated under the banner of evolution. The *only* think linking genocide and Darwinian thinking is a bunch of fundamentalist nutcases screaming that Darwin advocated genocide. They only have two reasons for that: that they don’t understand evolution, even the simpler kids’ version, and that they’re so terrified of people not agreeing with them that they’ll do just about anything to demonise those who prove them wrong.
Actually, now that I look at it, you’re sort of answered yourself here.
“so i suppose if the other religions are right it doesnt matter to me.”
Same with those with no religion. They’ve called it like they see it. Given everything I’ve described about Christianity below, as well as all the stuff I’ve left out that happened before the 1900s, why would *anyone* want to be Christian?
A university in Israel did a study that concluded the whole story of Exodus didn’t even happen historically. The Jews have the most to lose with that story not being true.
First of all, how do you even know they’re liberals? Secondly, since when do public schools teach that “Jesus is a lie”? When I was still in public school the mere mention of religion was barely ever brought up, much less the accuracy of the historicity of Jesus. Not only that, I can tell you that many atheists expands on what they’re taught in whatever educational institution they go to. You are also forgetting that many of the same people who have the same religious beliefs as you went to a public school and still believe. I doubt the public… Read more »
its good for you to act moral now, but then what happens if it suddenly becomes good for you to do something immoral? athiests may act nice when theyre in the minority because they dont want to make a stir, but their numbers increase a little and they starting telling Christians its unconsitutional to have the Nativity scene outside of churches or to wear crosses to public school. and school does have a role in teaching the religion of evolution. kids are so impressionable theyll believe whatever their teacher say (and they fail if they dont), we should either teach… Read more »
Funny thing – if you leave out all the stuff in a biology classroom that proves evolution is true, you get kids who don’t know what cancer is. Or penicillin. Or genes. And there isn’t a controversy, there’s only a lot of shouting by some people who want to think a book written before anyone thought of putting yeast in bread has all the answers. But that’s beside the point. No one’s ever said it’s unconstitutional to have a religious display on private property like at a church, or on one’s person. The unconstitutional (and rightly illegal) part is to… Read more »
penicillin isnt proof that evolution is true. nobody has ever seen penicillin evolve into the common cold. and what does cancer have to do with evolution? last i heard the cancer never breaks off to form a cat or anything, LOL
i heard people say that dog breeds are evidence of evolution but nobody ever added anything to a dog. no new traits (like a fifth leg or a second head or fins). NOT evolution
Dennis, what if your religion is wrong, and another one is right? Then you’re going to THEIR hell? How do you dismiss all other gods when that means if they are right, you are throwing YOUR chance away at heaven? Also, a threat is not a reason to believe. If I point a gun at you and command you to believe in Zeus or I’ll kill you, would that actually make you believe? Also, I went to Catholic schools until college. So I’ve seen both sides of the issue, so don’t assume I only go to liberal schools that feed… Read more »
no, if you read the Bible you see it is important to stand strong in the face of religious opposition. a good lesson for Christians in the US because we are persecuted daily.
also see my comment above about knowing which religion is right
“is it worth an eternity in hell just to avoid being moral?”
– Explain how it is moral to make decisions based off of fear of “hell” or “a god?” I would define that at strict immorality and selfishness at its purest. Enlighten me Dennis?
its hard for aTHINKests (i couldnt resist using that again) to understand because you are used to being concerned with gain for yourself. but it is not about a fear of hell. it is about the infinite joy of accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, and then you lead his life by his guiding hand. i am not moral for fear of hell, but for the promise of heaven and an eternty with the Lord. i have seen many people saved within my Church and they all say they could not understand it until they accepted the Lord… Read more »
That’s not what you said. You said, ““is it worth an eternity in hell just to avoid being moral?” Nice straw man argument, though.
You know what makes me lulz though? Ready? Are you? Here it comes…….
“its hard for aTHINKests (i couldnt resist using that again) to understand because you are used to being concerned with gain for yourself”
and then, less than two sentences later:
“i am not moral for fear of hell, but for the promise of heaven and an eternty with the Lord”
Same thing, man. Same thing.
I think you need to ask yourself, “how can you be open minded if you just go with what they teach you in *church* about …?”
The religious always say, “Why not be open-minded.” But it’s always a one-way street. Don’t they have to be open-minded about the possibility of no god??? And be sincere about it?
RELIGIOUS: are YOU sincerely open-minded to the possibility of NO god?
I think Dennis is just trolling us.
It’s a nice thought, but we know for certain there really are people in the world who think like that – so frightened of people not believing in a god that they’ll attach any social ill they can to the atheist in their head, just to feel morally superior – and that just so they can feel superior *somehow*.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7UVQ9KRxew http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx5EKaY1B8g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh38ygMiY5I Here you go Dennis, its a channel dedicated to the Bible, I wonder how many you can watch telling yourself thats not the real context or that theres no way that the bible actually says that. In the end, we all know why dennis actually believes in religion, because he is more concerned with believing in what is safe, secure and reassuring, rather than in believing in what is true or real. A reality without a hegemonic authoritarian ruler who can tell him what is right or wrong and that will reward him or punish him for… Read more »
All this chatter only proves one thing…Faith cannot be discussed academically or logically because it has no scientific basis in FACT.
Science is as open-minded about the God of Abraham as it is about Zeus, Ganesh, and Odin.
That is, it _is_ open minded.
Believers in those gods are close-minded about each others’ deities.