# "Is there a God" for noobs

I am trying to write a small essay about the issue. I intend to eventually submit it to reddit (both [r/religion](http://www.reddit.com/r/religion) and [r/atheism](http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism)), and to show it to my family. This is basic stuff. I basically want to show that:

*   Either God exists, or it doesn't. Therefore, either theism or atheism is false.
*   It is worthwhile to actively seek truth in this matter
*   Being confident is not the same as being arrogant, or intolerant.

My hope is to be able to be able to have meaningful discussions about the topic without being called arrogant or disrespectful. The present draft still miss an introduction, but I think I'll just state what I told above. So, what do you think? Did I miss something? Did I underestimate [inferential distances](http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Inferential_distance)? Could I use other wording? Is this just pointless? Overall, how someone who've never read Less Wrong nor Dawkings might react to that?

* * *

Edits:

*   Replaced "odds" by "likelihood".
*   Change my quotation to remove religious references (I kept Flat Earth, though). It is now (hopefully obviously) a full piece of fiction.
*   Replaced "meta" by a small explanation of it.
*   Removed "exist", in the hope of avoiding argument about the meaning of "existence".

* * *

**Missing Introduction**

Truth is universal
------------------

We all live in the same world. Of course, each of us perceive it differently. We don't see the same things, we don't live in the same places, we don't meet the same people. Because of that and more, we don't hold the same beliefs. But there's only one reality. If a statement is true, it is so for everyone.

For instance, I happen to wear black socks at the time of this writing. Believe it or not, that's the reality, so "Loup was wearing blacks socks when he wrote this" is true for everyone, including you. Even if you believe I'm lying, I _am_ wearing black socks. You can't be absolutely certain of this fact, but a fact it is.

Now imagine I believe the Earth is flat, and you believe the earth is (roughly) spherical. Those two beliefs are mutually contradictory. Clearly, one of us is mistaken.

We should avoid false beliefs
-----------------------------

> 31th day
> 
> My captain has gone nuts. I couldn't believe that at first. He's a good leader, and got us out of many tight situations. But he wants to sail west towards India. He actually believe that the Earth has the shape of a ball. A _ball_. Some sort of giant orb, floating in… nothing, I suppose. I'm no navigation master, but I do know one thing: if we sail west far enough, we will all fall down the bottomless pit of despair at the edge of the world.
> 
> I tried to talk him out of this folly, but he would have none of it. I'm sorry captain, but you leave me no choice. Tonight will be your end. For the sake of the crew. Please forgive me.

Holding false beliefs is dangerous. It has consequences, sometimes innocuous, sometimes tragic. You never know until you correct a previously false belief. If you care about anything, you should try and hold only true beliefs, because one false belief can be enough to destroy what you hold dear. Incidentally, that's basically why most of the time, lying is not nice.

Flaws in reasoning are even worse: they generate or sustain false beliefs. They are also more difficult to correct. Basically they're a reliable way to be wrong, which is potentially much more dangerous than any single wrong belief. If you find a flaw in your reasoning, eliminate it, then re-check your beliefs. If someone proposes you to adopt one, do not drink that cup, it's poisoned.

"I don't know" is a stance
--------------------------

Are my socks black? Think about it for 30 seconds, look at the evidence at your disposal, then answer honestly. There are 3 kinds of answers you might produce:

*   "Your socks are black." Meaning, you are reasonably sure that my socks are black.
*    "Your socks are not black." Meaning, you are reasonably sure that my socks aren't black.
*   "I don't know". Meaning that from your point of view, my socks could be black, or they could be of a different colour. You're not sure either way.

Note that all three answers share a common structure. They could all be phrased thus: "I estimate that the likelihood of your socks being black is X%". If X is close to 100%, you believe my socks are black. If it is close to 0%, you believe they're not. If X is, say, between 10% and 90%, then you're not sure. Anyway you're bound to choose a value for X, and that will be your stance. It is no less respectable than any other, provided you did your best to estimate the odds.

Disagreement is not intolerance
-------------------------------

Say I'm 99.9% confident that the Earth is flat, and you are 99.999% confident it is spherical. If we also know of each other's opinion, then we automatically strongly believe the other is mistaken. This is not intolerance. This is the direct consequence of our respective beliefs. If you weren't so sure that I'm wrong, you wouldn't be so sure that the Earth is spherical either. This is a matter of consistency.

There is hope however: if we are both reasonable, don't have flaws in our reasoning, have roughly equal access to evidence, and honestly attempt to reach the truth together, then we will eventually agree. At least one of us will radically change his mind.

Let's say that halfway through such a quest, you are still 99.999% confident the Earth is spherical, but I am only 60% confident. It means two things:

1.  I changed my mind.
2.  We still disagree.

This time, the disagreement is not as strong, but still significant: you estimate that flat Earth is barely worth considering. I on the other hand, think sailing West means 40% chances of falling at the edge of the world, which is just too risky.

No exception
------------

These rules apply to any question. Even controversial, emotional questions. So. Is there a God?

*   Either there is a God, or there isn't. Either way this is a fact. Inevitably, of atheists and theists, one group is mistaken.
    
*   This is an important question. A wrong answer can for instance lead us to forsake our lives or our souls for naught.
    
*   Agnosticism is less comfortable than it sounds. First, agnostics disagree with both theists and atheists. Second, any significant evidence should mostly turn them into either theists or atheists. And the importance of the question suggest they _should_ seek such evidence.
    
*   Many atheists are very sure there is no God, and many theists are very sure there is —even though they know of each other's opinions. Therefore, they both believe the other group is mistaken. This is not intolerance, this is consistency.
    
    I'm worried however by the lack of consensus after all this time. "Is there a God" is an old and important question, and as far as I know, there is plenty of widely accessible evidence, and numerous debates. I suppose our thinking still have problems.
    

Now, is there a God? Your answer should be of the form "My estimate of the likelihood that there is a God is X%". Don't style yourself as an atheist, believer, or agnostic. Assess the evidence at your disposal (science, scriptures, what you where told…), then give your number. Just bear in mind these sanity checks:

*   Your estimate may be very close to either 0% or 100%, which means you are very confident. Just to be sure, could you live up to your confidence, and say to the face of someone of the opposite opinion "you are mistaken"?
    
*   On the other hand, your estimate may be close to 50%. Just to be sure, are you positive that the evidence at your disposal is _that_ balanced? It is not stronger one way or another?
    
*   If you want to share your estimates with friends, make sure you talk about the same idea of God. A good starting point can be "a supernatural, sentient being that created the universe, is omnipotent and omniscient". You could add "is benevolent", or, "is still active in the universe", or "listen to prayers", all the way down to any particular religious dogma if you want to.

Like I said, these principles can apply to any question. Including the really scary ones, like "is there an afterlife?"