Myth #2: Atheists are stubborn and closed-minded.
The second myth for today involves the tired old attack that we non-believers are just too stubborn to hear "the knock", as they say. And although each atheist is free to think for himself (I'm sure you could find an atheist who's a stubborn, closed-minded ass), we are collectively lumped together, and accused of trusting science over god, and the believers can't understand why.
So, why should anyone trust science? This myth is often proclaimed by those who actually know little to nothing about the way science works. They don't understand that science doesn't start with a presupposition and then attempts to find clues to support the predetermined verdict. They don't realize that science is self-correcting; incorrect theories simply won't hold up to testing, and are weeded out by the very process of science.
Time and again, science has proved itself to be our best tool for understanding how the universe works. It is the fact that those who use its methods are the very opposite of "stubborn" and "closed-minded". As Sam Harris puts it, "Pretending to know things one doesn't know is a profound liability in science. And yet it is the life-blood of faith-based religion". Indeed, faith itself instructs those who hold to it to tighten their grip in the face of conflicting ideas or contrary evidence.
It's essentially a pot-and-kettle deal (while we atheists are the sugar jar). Those who believe in things without valid reason to do so (the very definition of faith) make up the ones shouting "stubborn and closed-minded" at those without it. Never mind the fact that faith is unreliable. How could anyone in their right mind try to convince themselves or others that glorified wishful-thinking is preferable to demonstrable, repeatable testing and observation? The very devout of the faithful will actually have their faith strengthened by being proved wrong with science.
If that isn't close-minded, I don't know what is.
-STA
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 14
There is nothing open minded about religion unless one professes that he may be wrong. And few of us are willing to do this...believers or non believers.
Scientific investigation must leave the possibility of mistakes and wrong conclusions open. For instance, in the forming of our description of the universe and how it behaves...many men...Newton, Leibniz, Mach, Einstein and many others, made conclusions that turned out to be wrong, but their input contributed to the evolution of our present day definition of spacetime, which is still challenged and rightly so.
Religion allows for no such challenges.
The infallibility argument holds no water for me when religious people start their rants about science vs. religion. The fact that one supports infallibility and seeks knowledge and the other denies infallibility and seeks blind faith and loyalty to centuries-old beliefs is a no-brainer for me - science wins hands down.
I have recently been described as an anti-theist. I think this term, rather than atheist, may better suit my stance here. I am "anti" rather than simply "without" religious beliefs. My lack of tolerance for religion probably casts me into the "stubborn, closed-minded ass" classification, but I accept that designation. I believe that religion is harmful to the betterment society and the advancement of man as he seeks knowledge so as to better tend to this planet.
Delusional thinking is a cover and a dodge...a security blanket...which by itself would pose no real dangers except to those who engage in delusional thinking. But the spill over of delusional behavior limits our collective advancement as it acts as a road block to truthful investigation. As the "believers" train their children to avoid responsibility and truthfulness...the epidemic of delusion spreads and becomes more and more a quagmire of the lost ability to think and reason for ourselves.
Just kidding. Great article Tristan.