Recently, I conducted a poll which asked if you either:
A) Were a theist who became atheist
B) Were an atheist who became theist
C) Have always had the same beliefs
I understand that this didn’t include every option in terms of personal belief, but I wanted to make a point based on statistics, although the ILP forums are hardly a sample population worthy of making a statistical assumption. I will, however, state that I believe if the same survey had been taken nationwide, the results would be somewhat similar.
I hypothesized that when this poll was conducted, the majority would have had the same belief system throughout their lives. For the remainder, I hypothesized that the number of those who were theist and became atheist would outweigh those who were atheist and became theist.
I do realize there are several variables involved that I am not taking into consideration in this study, in terms of the “why†behind why people made the switch one way or the other. This study is far from science, but it does raise some interesting questions.
God(s) either exist, or he/they don’t/doesn’t. I realize there are infinite flavors of deities, but either there exists a power greater than human beings that transcends our understanding, or there is not. I realize this excludes some beliefs, but this is not the point I wish to debate.
Now, obviously somebody is right, because God can’t exist and not exist at the same time (although I guess one could argue that he could, if he’s omniscient and transcends logic and understanding =P). So there are two questions that are raised:
A) Is the truth always more logical? Meaning: If one group believes in God(s), and the other does not, is the group who believes the truth more logical? This is not a question regarding the truth of God, but rather the logic of truth.
If the answer to this question is yes, the truth is always more logical, then obviously one of these groups is less logical than the other. Now, based on our EXTREMELY small sample population, as expected, the majority have maintained their beliefs; however, a larger group has started theist and become atheist than visa-versa.
Although there are many other conclusions one can draw from this, one possible conclusion is as follows: If theism is true, then a larger number of people have, after knowing the truth, changed their belief to something that is not. From this, I would conclude that atheists are less rational. If, however, atheism is true, atheists are more logical for making the change in beliefs.
Both of these conclusions hinge on the assumption that the truth is always more logical, which is a large topic in and of itself. But the main focus of this post is to attempt to show that it is apparent that it’s not just a matter of preference, and clearly one or the other of the groups is being irrational, and denying the truth. Which group, for this post, is not a matter of debate, but I would love to hear your thoughts.
And please, feel free to pick this post apart if there are logical fallacies, or if you think the whole thing is a piece of crap that proves nothing. I’m not easily offended. 