My Threshold For Supernatural Claims

Image courtesy of Stockvault.

A recent nonversation over on Nan’s blog (here) got me thinking about how people claim the supernatural exists and affects reality – among other things. I tried explaining to someone that debate over these claims isn’t really appropriate when there isn’t any new evidence that people can evaluate for themselves. The reason I put it in these terms is partly based on my thinking when I initially deconverted (here). Evidence means different things to different people, and deriding others for not accepting it isn’t exactly persuasive.

It’s been over three years since I last thought about it in much detail. Since then, I’ve encountered many different people who have assured me in general that there’s something out there, or more specifically that some specific idea of a deity is right around the corner. As a general rule, I tend to ignore such platitudes. Although I understand they’re meant as a kindness, these aren’t claims I can do anything with.

I’ve also learned that fairness matters.
There are many people out there who claim that their view of supernatural entities happens to be real. The specifics vary, so it’s hard to pinpoint what is being said or implied. Over the years I’ve been alive, I have met people who believe in a myriad of different things like earth spirits, fairies, and angels. If I wanted to be fair, I thought I had to deliberately consider all of their demands on my attention.

I needed to find a way to filter all of these claims and give them equal priority. Over the years, this has led to an informal threshold that I rarely articulate. Namely, the threshold is that if someone is exceptionally interested in getting me to consider a supernatural anything, they need to provide something I can evaluate on my own – that also doesn’t require someone else telling me what reality is. What this means is that books and arguments in favor of how deity X could do thing Y isn’t something I’m going to consider. If your belief is that something supernatural answers prayers, I’d like to see some sort of independent demonstration, preferably under lab conditions.

And yes, I understand this excludes a TON of information out there. For me, it does it uniformly. So, I’ll ignore a claim to consider reincarnation for the exact same reason I’ll ignore a claim that I’m going to burn for eternity. More importantly, if someone showed me something I can test for either point, I’d consider them equally.

What we give time and consideration to also matters.
Consider this post by Ark regarding the drawbacks of preaching to youth. Children exist at the mercy of their parents in almost every human society on Earth. They don’t get the luxury I have as an adult; they don’t get to set healthy boundaries for themselves with regards to what information they take in. All too often, parents and other adults can impose their ideas on young people before they are able to process the information themselves.

Most of the time, this is probably benign. After all, people wouldn’t operate this way if it wasn’t efficient and didn’t carry benefits. But there are consequences to such impositions. William Lane Craig, for example, argues it’s totally appropriate for a deity to torture children for eternity for no other reason than it can. Are there any parents teaching this to their kids? Is this wise to do so? Should they wait for their kids to become more developed before laying this on them?

Having thresholds for this stuff matters.
It works for everyone. Too often, we talk about free speech, free will, and freedom of choice. All of that’s meaningless when people are leveraged to consider things for terrible reasons. Bullying people into a belief doesn’t happen in a truly free society. Too often, that sort of thing can serve as a barrier to learning.

I also want to point out that I am a person who is excessively focused on efficiency in discussion. Some people might feel like this is dismissive of their points. Just because I don’t take one up doesn’t mean I hold people in less esteem. Rather, it just means I can’t add anything productive to the thought. To me, wasting someone’s time is uncivilized behavior. Although I can’t always avoid it, I am always looking for ways to behave more civilly.

Advertisements

20 thoughts on “My Threshold For Supernatural Claims

  1. Great post SB. I certainly can appreciate and your attitude towards these things. What particular got me thinking was the following – you wrote:

    And yes, I understand this excludes a TON of information out there. For me, it does it uniformly. So, I’ll ignore a claim to consider reincarnation for the exact same reason I’ll ignore a claim that I’m going to burn for eternity. More importantly, if someone showed me something I can test for either point, I’d consider them equally.

    I think this here is where I have a hard time gaining ground with someone. For you and I, it makes perfect sense that “I am not just denying your Christian claims, I would ask the same thing of everybody in any religion.” In fact I try to bring this up. But it’s beyond them separating science and religion, they also treat other religions the same way they treat scientific evidence. It’s unclear to me why evidence for reincarnation is substantially different to evidence for heaven and hell. Or why the Bhagavad Gita is any less valid than the Bible. So even if you want to put Biblical evidence on the same footing as scientific evidence, then we must also put the evidence for the truth of other religions on the same pedestal, but they never do that one. So they aren’t even consistent in of themselves when it comes to what they consider evidence. It’s very frustrating. LOL

    Liked by 2 people

    • Putting on my former Christian hat, I’d say that most often it boils down to the blind spot of trust that gets built in the conversion process. Trust is equated with granting weight to something, and people are taught to trust the bible. That trust isn’t present for any other religious work, so it can get dismissed.

      Sticking to a uniform standard does actually highlight the double standard that others impose. While it might be frustrating that you can’t convince someone to let go of it, other people will see it and might learn from it.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. I read each of the articles you linked to, and found some interesting blogs, so thanks. 🙂 You said, “William Lane Craig, for example, argues it’s totally appropriate for a deity to torture children for eternity for no other reason than it can.” After reading that article, I’m amazed that you can make such a statement. The whole article was dedicated to the justice in punishment. Thanks for sharing though, take care.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hey there!

      You’re right that WLC couches his article in terms of justice and fairness, but he also relies on the assumption that this deity is in a position to judge anyone. It’s that assumption which rests on nothing more than the alleged nature of the deity itself. From a different perspective, it looks like this deity judges people for no other reason than that’s just the way things are.

      That WLC is dressing up the idea is fine; some Christians might agree with it. But not all Christians agree with it (I know some Calvinists who would vehemently disagree that their deity’s heart breaks for anything), and certainly not everyone outside the faith agrees with it.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s