# The logic behind believing or not believing **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 5, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226 "2013-06-05T17:58:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![TommyzNR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@TommyzNR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TommyzNR)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/21 "2013-06-06T13:26:12Z")
To be a logical intelligent critical thinker I would start with “what is the origin of religion?” Religion is either man made or God inspired. In either case this place we live in must have been a pretty brutal place for there to be a need for rules to which we should live by. This pretty brutal place either caused God to begin to reveal himself to limited numbers of people, or it caused various groups to make up stuff to try to get people to live a more peaceful life. The critical thinker has to decide whether eyewitness accounts of a couple thousand years of miracles are believable or hoaxes made up to strengthen man made religion. If you can come to grips with either side of the argument you have to make a big leap of faith. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/22 "2013-06-06T13:37:51Z")
You can be perfectly rational and still believe there are things we don’t understand or don’t know. The rational person admits there is no scientific evidence of the existence of God, and that belief in God is based on faith and not science. Being rational does not mean disbelieving anything you don’t understand, only those things that can be proven false with a high degree of certainty. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/23 "2013-06-06T14:20:20Z")
> [@TommyzNR](#): > > The critical thinker has to decide whether eyewitness accounts of a couple thousand years of miracles are believable or hoaxes made up to strengthen man made religion. One anonymous person writing that a hundred other people saw something doesn’t even count as _one_ eyewitness account. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/24 "2013-06-06T14:23:00Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > You can be perfectly rational and still believe there are things we don’t understand or don’t know. The rational person admits there is no scientific evidence of the existence of God, and that belief in God is based on faith and not science. Being rational does not mean disbelieving anything you don’t understand, only those things that can be proven false with a high degree of certainty. In what category do you put God? ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/25 "2013-06-06T14:30:30Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Your friend demonstrates cognitive dissonance in action. He starts with his belief: that a logical, intelligent critical thinker could not possibly believe in God. Then, no matter how many examples he encounters that contradict his belief, he ignores them and holds on to his belief. Not necessarily. His belief could in fact not be an unreasoned asumption but a conclusion after a study of the information available. In that case his assertion is consistent with logic. Rather than taking the OP’s friend’s statement as a ‘no true scotsmen argument’ then, it could be taken as an expression of confusion over the idea of a logical person believing in god. A perfectly reasonable interpretation of the phrasing used. > [@](#): > > You could send him links to the [large number](http://theblogthatwasthursday.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/debunking-dawkins-religion-and-education/) of [studies](http://theblogthatwasthursday.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/religion-and-education-lets-hammer-dawkins-some-more/) that have found a positive correlation between educational success and religiosity. His cognitive dissonance would probably ensure that he’d ignore that result as well, but he might at least produce some amusing excuses for doing so. He might also point out the [studies](http://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/harver/1913.html) which show that a positive correlation between education and religiosity is due more to economical factors and less to intelligence, and of course the [many](http://www.anth.uconn.edu/degree_programs/ecolevo/divineintuition.pdf) [studies](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120426143856.htm) which show a negative correlation between logical thinking and religiosity. ---
**Author:** ![TheSeaOtter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ed655f/32.png) [@TheSeaOtter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheSeaOtter)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/26 "2013-06-06T14:44:59Z")
Yeah, unless the category in question is ‘Logical, intelligent rational thinkers who have access to sufficient information and specifically applied that logic to their belief system and accepted the result’, there’s still always room for believing contradictory things. Humans are _good_ at believing contradictory things, they do it all the time. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/27 "2013-06-06T14:47:28Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In what category do you put God? No scientific proof of the existence of God. After that it doesn’t concern me much. ---
**Author:** ![TommyzNR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@TommyzNR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TommyzNR)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/28 "2013-06-06T14:48:59Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > One anonymous person writing that a hundred other people saw something doesn’t even count as _one_ eyewitness account. UMMMM…what form do you want it in from say a couple thousand years ago? How many do you need, 100 people reporting similar miracles? 1000? How many have there been? By the way, that is the leap of faith I am talking about…again on either side of the argument. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/29 "2013-06-06T14:50:45Z")
You believe that an all-powerful, all-knowing eternal invisible “god” just thought up the Universe. I believe that if I drop a bowling ball it is more likely to hit the floor than the ceiling. Does this mean that we should equate the two beliefs? ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/30 "2013-06-06T14:53:24Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > No scientific proof of the existence of God. After that it doesn’t concern me much. You brought it up: > [@TriPolar](#): > > You can be perfectly rational and still believe there are things we don’t understand or don’t know. The rational person admits there is no scientific evidence of the existence of God, and that belief in God is based on faith and not science. Being rational does not mean disbelieving anything you don’t understand, only those things that can be proven false with a high degree of certainty. So what _would_ fall under the category of “those things that can be proven false with a high degree of certainty.”? ---
**Author:** ![TommyzNR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@TommyzNR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TommyzNR)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/31 "2013-06-06T15:28:29Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > You believe that an all-powerful, all-knowing eternal invisible “god” just thought up the Universe. I believe that if I drop a bowling ball it is more likely to hit the floor than the ceiling. > Does this mean that we should equate the two beliefs? Didn’t think we were debating evolution or whether the Bible is literal or any of the other paths you are trying to pursue. Those are definitely problems for those who believe to reconcile. Those who do not believe have to reconcile that there have been thousands of accounts from biblical times to present day of miracles and other events that suggest God is real. They have to reconcile the drive to create a God by individuals, small groups of people and whole societies who were isolated from each other and came up with very similar stories. Brush them of as coincidence, conspiracy or loony if you like but that is a decision that has to be made along the way. My point is the intellectual, logical critical thinker can have either view based on where they start with the beginning of religion. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/32 "2013-06-06T15:30:11Z")
There have never been accounts of miracles. There have been accounts of unusual occurrences. ---
**Author:** ![TommyzNR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@TommyzNR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TommyzNR)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/33 "2013-06-06T15:49:27Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > There have never been accounts of miracles. There have been accounts of unusual occurrences. I can go with that. There have been thousands of unusual occurances that suggest God might exist. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/34 "2013-06-06T15:50:50Z")
I think a critical thinker can believe in god – they just need to avoid applying their critical faculties to that aspect of their lives. Unfortunately this kind of compartmentalization is something many are able to do. If the question was: “Would someone thinking rationally, and objectively, who critically checks their own reasoning for logical fallacies, come to the conclusion that god exists?” My answer is no, never. It’s just not a rational conclusion to come to. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/35 "2013-06-06T15:51:10Z")
> [@TommyzNR](#): > > I can go with that. There have been thousands of unusual occurances that suggest God might exist. Which “god”? ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/36 "2013-06-06T15:53:12Z")
> [@TommyzNR](#): > > I can go with that. There have been thousands of unusual occurances that suggest God might exist. Which one unusual occurance of the supposed “thousands” best suggests the existence of a particular god? ---
**Author:** ![TommyzNR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@TommyzNR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TommyzNR)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/37 "2013-06-06T16:08:40Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Which one unusual occurance of the supposed “thousands” best suggests the existence of a particular god? Go ahead and pick one. If you don’t know where to look you have not considered the possibilty that God exists according to critical thinking principles. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2013, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/38 "2013-06-06T16:11:09Z")
> [@TommyzNR](#): > > Go ahead and pick one. If you don’t know where to look you have not considered the possibilty that God exists according to critical thinking principles. It was _your_ statement-_you_ pick _your_ best example. I can’t do it for you. ---
**Author:** ![TommyzNR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@TommyzNR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TommyzNR)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/39 "2013-06-06T16:14:22Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It was _your_ statement-_you_ pick _your_ best example. I can’t do it for you. And I can’t make you an intelligent logical critical thinker. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226/40 "2013-06-06T16:18:12Z")
> [@TommyzNR](#): > > UMMMM…what form do you want it in from say a couple thousand years ago? How many do you need, 100 people reporting similar miracles? 1000? How many have there been? > > By the way, that is the leap of faith I am talking about…again on either side of the argument. I don’t know about the believer side of the argument, but there’s no leap of faith necessary for my side (not believing). God goes in the same category as grey big-eyed aliens, unicorns, and fire-breathing dragons for me- something that many people believe in or once did, but I see no reason to. As far as evidence from thousands of years ago- eyewitness accounts require eyewitnesses, and all the eyewitnesses from long ago are dead. So there are no eyewitness accounts of events from long ago- only written reports about claims by eyewitnesses. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-logic-behind-believing-or-not-believing/660226.md?page=3)