# Atheism versus Theism. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 12, 2004, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906 "2004-10-12T23:56:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/61 "2004-10-14T10:08:25Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > Sort of; the thought occurred to me in more abstract form; I merely hammered it into the Red/blue pill metaphor for fun, but the resonance is there nevertheless; do you want to be _right_(blue pill) or do you want to know _what’s really going on?_(red pill). > > I want to know _what’s really going on_, even if that turns out to be something I don’t particularly like. I choose the red pill. “What’s really going on” could be anything from a vast array of possibilities, some of which may be horrific. E.g. the Earth could be a temporary resting place and when we die we all return to hell to be tormented for eons. I’m not saying that this is the case, but there is no way to rule out that “What’s really going on” isn’t some horrific nightmare. And given that what we believe to be the state of the universe is not too bad (at least for each of us), it seems very risky to give that up for “What’s really going on” To put it simply, after your decision of which pill to take, the universe will be in one of two states: the one you currently believe it to be in, and a “random” state that could be anything. I guess I’m being risk averse, but I’d take the one I currently believe it to be in, because there is no limit to how bad the other state can be. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/62 "2004-10-14T10:18:59Z")
> [@Waccoe](#): > > Interesting use of the word “merely”. What about me? The blue pill is your chance to give me everlasting life, and you’re saying your moral integrity (or something) is more important. Tsk. Heh. You can take the blue pill if you like (I think we’ll assume that doing so would have to spawn a new universe for you), but for me, it might not actually feel _real_. Eternal life is possibly nice, don’t get me wrong, but don’t you ever want to know what’s really going on? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/63 "2004-10-14T10:25:59Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > “What’s really going on” could be anything from a vast array of possibilities, some of which may be horrific. > > E.g. the Earth could be a temporary resting place and when we die we all return to hell to be tormented for eons. > > I’m not saying that this is the case, but there is no way to rule out that “What’s really going on” isn’t some horrific nightmare. > > And given that what we believe to be the state of the universe is not too bad (at least for each of us), it seems very risky to give that up for “What’s really going on” > > To put it simply, after your decision of which pill to take, the universe will be in one of two states: the one you currently believe it to be in, and a “random” state that could be anything. > > I guess I’m being risk averse, but I’d take the one I currently believe it to be in, because there is no limit to how bad the other state can be. Well, I _suppose_, but then again, a theist taking the blue pill possibly creates an omnipotent deity that might simply choose to him you as a pawn in some amusing little game. I’ll take my chances with the red pill, thanks - it won’t create a random universe, it will just inform you which aspects of the current one you’re wrong about. You’re no worse off. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/64 "2004-10-14T10:28:10Z")
> [@Waccoe](#): > > Surely there’s nobody who would \*prefer \*the absence of a God? I definitely do, and don’t call me Shirley. This is the Straight Dope. We take the red pill. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/65 "2004-10-14T10:36:38Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I’ll take my chances with the red pill, thanks - it won’t create a random universe, it will just inform you which aspects of the current one you’re wrong about. You’re no worse off. It won’t create a random universe, that’s correct, but the following is true Today, you believe that the universe is in state X. If you are correct, then neither the blue pill nor the red pill will change anything. If you are wrong, then the universe is actually in state Y. By definition, you don’t know what state Y is, and it could be _anything_. So, by your choice of pill, the universe tomorrow will be in either state X or state Y. Since state Y can be _anything_, possibly worse than the most horrible nightmare you can imagine, it is an immense risk to choose to stay with state Y (which is the current state), than to impose a new state (state X) that you already feel comfortable with. ---
**Author:** ![Waccoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Waccoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waccoe)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/66 "2004-10-14T10:44:00Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Since state Y can be _anything_, possibly worse than the most horrible nightmare you can imagine, it is an immense risk to choose to stay with state Y (which is the current state), than to impose a new state (state X) that you already feel comfortable with. Yeh - **if** you feel comfortable. Gimme the red! ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/67 "2004-10-14T10:51:26Z")
> [@](#): > > it could be _anything_. This assumes that equal probabilistic weighting is given to a world of purple centaurs playing with humanity like an X-box game and to a world identical, or at least very similar to, the one we experience now: is that really a _reasonable_ assumption? This perhaps shows that the choice of pill is also partly indicative of one’s _confidence_ that the world is at least approximately as it appears. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/68 "2004-10-14T10:53:19Z")
I’m not sure that approximation is close enough. The tiniest change in law or substance of the universe can result in its annihilation. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/69 "2004-10-14T11:03:48Z")
By the same token though, the universe _as you currently understand it to be_ may not be an inherently stable entity - the blue pill could also buy you a universe-eating paradox or something. ---
**Author:** ![davenportavenger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f8ce5/32.png) [@davenportavenger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davenportavenger)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/70 "2004-10-14T11:05:31Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > The blue pill will conform the universe to whatever you currently believe it to be - you won’t necessarily know how much has changed, of course, but it will impose your beliefs on the structure of reality. > > The red pill will leave the universe completely unchanged, but will enlighten you about the beliefs you currently hold that are objectively incorrect - you won’t know _everything_, so there will still be stuff to discover, but you’ll know what you ought to discard. Am I the first and only one to get the choice of pills? If so, red. Is this a trial that’s being repeated over and over, and do I know if someone has already taken the blue? If the answer to both those questions is yes, then the foundations of reality have already been shaken, so whichever pill I choose will be meaningless. I’ll already be living in someone else’s delusion, so why try to find out the “truth?” In that case, blue. If I’m going to live in a delusional world it might as well be my own. By the way, can I use this scenario in a short story? It would make an excellent short story. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/71 "2004-10-14T11:11:35Z")
> [@](#): > > The tiniest change in law or substance of the universe can result in its annihilation. The universe exists: an annihilated universe allows **no** “red pill to be taken”. My act of taking the red pill demonstrates that, assuming logic is not so much purple-centaurian nonsense, that I cannot be so wrong that the universe is _really_ annihilated. ---
**Author:** ![Waccoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Waccoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waccoe)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/72 "2004-10-14T11:23:02Z")
I think most people would go for red, for different reasons. If you’re unconfident about your view of the universe, and unhappy with the way it is (like me), you’re bound to go for red. If you’re confident about your view of the universe, and unhappy with it, you’re less interested in taking either pill, but it may as well be red, just so you can take some small satisfaction from the fact that you were right all along. There’s no upside in blue. If you’re confident and happy, again it’s no big deal, and you cheerfully take the red and say told ya so. It’s only if you’re unconfident and happy, presumably like Polerius, that you go for blue. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/73 "2004-10-14T11:24:14Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > This assumes that equal probabilistic weighting is given to a world of purple centaurs playing with humanity like an X-box game and to a world identical, or at least very similar to, the one we experience now: is that really a _reasonable_ assumption? “Probability” has no meaning in this context. The universe is in the state it is in. You cannot assign a “probability” to any given state. You may have a “hunch” that some scenarios are more “likely” than others, but these are non-scientific concepts. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/74 "2004-10-14T11:38:10Z")
> [@Sentient](#): > > The universe exists: an annihilated universe allows no “red pill to be taken”. Yes. However, the universe is not annihilated until _after_ you take your pill. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/75 "2004-10-14T11:39:14Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > This assumes that equal probabilistic weighting is given to a world of purple centaurs playing with humanity like an X-box game and to a world identical, or at least very similar to, the one we experience now: is that really a _reasonable_ assumption? This perhaps shows that the choice of pill is also partly indicative of one’s _confidence_ that the world is at least approximately as it appears. What would be different in the current world if we were in an X-box game being played by purple centaurs? There is an infinite range of scenarios whose “projection” onto our everyday experience is identical. That is, our everyday experience is identical, no matter which of these infinite scenarios is true. So, how can you distinguish between them based on your experience of the world? How can you weigh one scenario more that the other? BTW, even though you can’t distinguish them in terms of differences in everyday experiences, it doesn’t mean that they all result in similar after-death experiences, if such experiences exist. E.g if we are living in a simulation, when we “die”, it could just mean “game over” for our other-world persona and he would just go home from the arcade where he was playing us. Or, if we lare living in a simulation, when we “die”, if we are simply intelligent digital objects with no other-world persona “playing us”, we simply vanish from existence (or, in computing terms, the “destructor” for our object is called) These two situations are indistinguishable in terms of everyday experience, so there is no way to really know. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/76 "2004-10-14T11:43:34Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > Am I the first and only one to get the choice of pills? If so, red. > > Is this a trial that’s being repeated over and over, and do I know if someone has already taken the blue? If the answer to both those questions is yes, then the foundations of reality have already been shaken, so whichever pill I choose will be meaningless. I’ll already be living in someone else’s delusion, so why try to find out the “truth?” In that case, blue. If I’m going to live in a delusional world it might as well be my own. > > By the way, can I use this scenario in a short story? It would make an excellent short story. I think we’d have to assume that the blue pill will, if necessary, spawn a new universe exactly to your specification. I see no reason why you shouldn’t use the scenario in a story (I’d like to read it when you’re done), except that it isn’t really all that different from the premise in _The Matrix_ (and indeed all those philosophical traditions upon which the movie draws so heavily). ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/77 "2004-10-14T11:51:25Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > “Probability” has no meaning in this context. > The universe is in the state it is in. You cannot assign a “probability” to any given state. > > You may have a “hunch” that some scenarios are more “likely” than others, but these are non-scientific concepts. Well, this entire premise is utter science fiction: the red pill tells you the “right” answer (and we’re supposed to _believe_ it??) and the blue pill creates an omnipotent deity even if one wasn’t there before! The red pill asks us to explore possible worlds and their similarity (or not) to Earth 2004, with or without God. My purple centaur world, or your hell-world, are possible worlds: you called them “states X, Y _etc._”. I’d say that the words “could”, “possibly” and “risk” speak the language of probability. Proposing that these possible worlds are just as likely to be true as Earth 2004 is, in my view, _itself_ an important statement. Just a nitpick, really: an idle musing. I don’t fundamentally disagree with you or anything. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/78 "2004-10-14T11:51:36Z")
If you truly believe in your chosen religion, wouldn’t you _have_ to take the red pill? Taking the blue pill would be the same as admitting that there is doubt in your mind about the reality of your position. ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/79 "2004-10-14T11:56:02Z")
> [@](#): > > **Lib** : However, the universe is not annihilated until after you take your pill. That could only happen in the case of the _blue_ pill, surely? The red pill is simply “finding out the truth”. I cannot see how taking the red pill could possibly lead one to the truth that the universe is _actually_ annihilated, assuming logic was not nonsense. > [@](#): > > **Polerius** :These two situations are indistinguishable in terms of everyday experience, so there is no way to really know. Agreed: the premise of the red pill is that you _do_ suddenly “know the truth”. Impossible of course, but an entertaining premise nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906/80 "2004-10-14T12:00:58Z")
> [@gum](#): > > **Meatros** I’ll just repeat: _All_ fundamental branches, of \*all religions \*who teach that sort of stuff, are enough to make me happy to be an atheïst. [which is what this debate is about, correct?] I understand and to a certain extent I agree with you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism-versus-theism/268906.md?page=5)