Free A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian Page A

how you could not have a response to something so central to your life. So you’re not sure what would make your belief falsifiable?
OM : I am sure. As I told you, the bones of Christ.
PB : But what evidence would it take to satisfy you that they were actually the bones of Christ? If you could never know—or if there would be no way for you to know—that they were the bones of Christ, then your belief isn’t falsifiable. If your belief isn’t falsifiable then do you really believe on the basis of evidence?
(Brief pause)
PB : I don’t say this lightly, but I don’t think you’re being sincere. You know that there’s absolutely no evidence one could present that would make you change your mind.
OM : There is. I already told you.
PB : But you don’t believe that. That’s verbal behavior. You’ve created impossible conditions and you’re okay with that? That’s not the intellectual attitude one has when forming one’s beliefs on the basis of reason and evidence.
(Silence)
PB : Here’s what I don’t get. Why don’t you just say that you’re not open to evidence and that you’re going to believe anyway? Isn’t that a more honest and sincere way to live your life?
OM : I told you. I am open to evidence. I’m willing to hear what someone would say.
PB : I don’t believe you. You’re pretending that you’re open to evidence but you’re not really open to evidence.
OM : I am open to evidence, but you’re not open to faith.
PB : This isn’t about me being open to faith; this is about you being open to evidence. You’ve just told me you’re open to evidence, but when pressed you can’t provide details of that evidence. Specifically, what would that evidence look like?
OM : Faith is belief in things hoped for that reason points toward.
PB : That’s a deepity. Let’s get back to the question at hand. If a famous archeologist announced that he’d discovered the bones of Christ, what evidence would you need to believe that he was telling the truth?
(End of the conversation)
    DIG DEEPER
    Articles
    Brock and Balloun, “Behavioral Receptivity to Dissonant Information” (Brock & Balloun, 1967)
    David Gal and Derek Rucker, “When in Doubt, Shout! Paradoxical Influences of Doubt on Proselytizing” (Gal & Rucker, 2010)
    Book
    Cass Sunstein, Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide (Sunstein, 2009)
    Videos
    Peter Boghossian, “Walking the Talk” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ARwO9jNyjA
    Peter Boghossian, “Critical Thinking Crash Course” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7zbEiNnY5M
    NOTES
     
The Danish philosopher Kierkegaard writes that anxiety is a key human experience. Most people are afraid of feeling anxiety, and they’ll do anything they can to distract themselves from it. What Kierkegaard means is that if you want to live a full, meaningful human life—catch hold of anxiety and don’t let it go. Use anxiety to follow your thoughts as a guide to see where it leads you. Don’t try to escape. Let it energize your life; let it bring you awareness not only of your ignorance but also of your desire to understand moments in every experience. At least for Kierkegaard, holding onto anxiety is a key to a fulfilled life.
When people aren’t reasoned into their faith, it is difficult to reason them out of their faith.
Many people of faith come to their beliefs independent of reason. In order to reason them out of their faith they’ll have to be taught how to reason first, and then instructed in the application of this new tool to their epistemic condition. The totality of this endeavor is indeed challenging, but a goal of the Street Epistemologist is to provide people with hope. Reason has emancipatory potential.
There’s something to be said for Pascal Boyer’s account in Religion Explained that can help to understand this strategy (Boyer, 2001). Boyer is one of the leading figures in what can generally be referred to as neurotheology. Thinkers like Jonathan Haidt, Michael Gazzaniga, and