My Default....

I installed a new web browser for my computer to try out. It is kind of complicated and I don't like it very much. It asked me as soon as I opened it for the first time on whether or not I want it to be my default browser. I chose no - I like my old browser thank you very much. We see this word a lot: default browser, web page, color, menu, etc. What are these for? Its the response to an action when nothing is chosen, or a preselected response to an action. Now we have encountered many people saying what our default worldview should be. A common view now of atheism is what most call negative atheism or what I call passive atheism. It is the view that until sufficient evidence says otherwise, we should believe there is no God. Lack of sufficient evidence brings reason to believe that the thing trying to be proved doesn't exist. Negative or passive atheism just says that the default worldview should be atheism - not theism or even agnosticism - when the evidence isn't in the favor of theism. Now this sounds reasonable but they mean this regardless if the atheistic position has positive arguments for its view. For the sole reason that the arguments that you have heard about theism, to you, are unsound you must automatically assume that God doesn't exist. What if there are other arguments? Better yet, what right do you have to say that something absolutely doesn't exist based on a few bad arguments?

This is the problem with atheism: in tries to defend an absolute negative. Regardless on whether you think you can positively prove the non-existence of God (which is impossible) or negatively prove it (just say lack of evidence is reason enough) you are still making an absolute negative claim. Negative atheism is merely agnosticism that tries to makes a decision that is ultimately blind. This default view is illogical in and of itself. Why not polytheism instead atheism? Most say that there is no evidence for polytheism either, but that is just digging a bigger hole. Atheism is still a position that must be proved for the very reason that it is a position. It is like Tom and Sandra standing in a room with three chairs. Sandra starts to sit in one and Tom says, "Don't sit there, it doesn't look sturdy enough." Sandra looks, agrees, and moves to the next chair but Tom stops her again and says, "That chair doesn't look good either." Sandra again scrutinizes the chair and agrees with Tom and goes to sit in the last chair. Before Tom can say a word she just looks at him in discontent and says, "I don't care how sturdy it seems, I have to sit somewhere." We all have to "sit" as it were but somehow negative atheism no longer has to go through the same rigors as the other two merely because its the only one left. You cannot prove you're car will work just because no one else's does. It doesn't make sense. When you chose a worldview you are chosing a positive action not a default.

So what should be the default worldview in regards to the existence of God? There isn't one. Everyone is biased. It's as simple as that. You will judge the question based on how you feel or have been taught or whatever. When truth is concerned only one choice is right so the default has to be the right one but that is what you are trying to find out so it is a moot concern alltogether and makes negative atheism even harder to follow.

Janurary post I never posted

It's amazing what will come out of mind that has abandoned its foundations. G. K. Chesterton rightly implied (he never said it but he gave the idea and people have merely shortened his idea) that when a man stops believing in God, he doesn't then believe in nothing, but he will believe in anything. Now I'm not going to go off on a tangent that so many people do and say that the world has lost its belief in God and therefore we are becoming a society who will believe in anything. This is true but said too much and is usually grossly overexagerated. I merely want to use this as a backdrop to what I really want to say. It is a biblical notion and common sense to believe in what you have always believed until proven or persuaded to deny it. So many christians will find question in a part of christianity and will immediately lose faith in that aspect even though they have yet to find an answer. Not only do they fail to see God's relationship as a tool for getting answers but they fail to see the difference between suspect and guilt. God has really never asked us to blindly follow Him but really has just asked us to prove Him wrong. Again Chesterton said that the Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting but has been found difficult and left untried. Jesus said, "Come, follow Me." He said we must be like children to enter the kingdom of God. He was merely saying we must be humble enough to take Him on. He did not ask for an ignorant loyalty but a humble one. If He asked us to ignorantly follow Him, He wouldn't of spent much time talking to us in a such a way or performing miracles. He gave us plenty of weight behind His presence and merely asked us to take it on.