[MD] Are theists irrational?

[John Carl]

Steve,

Good question.

My opinion is that not all theists are irrational, though most probably are,
going on the evidence.  But taking a postulate as fundamental is a big no-no
in metaphysical speculation.

You ask how we can tell the difference between the rational theist and the
non-rational and I'd say the difference is right at the point of being
willing to be objective about one's beliefs.


John the anti-postulator




On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Steven Peterson
<peterson.steve at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Can an MOQer make the claim that theists are irrational?
>
> Jeffrey Stout from "Rorty on Religion and Politics:
> "Because Rorty and I have both been persuaded by our pragmatist
> forebears to treat rationality as a more permissive and
> context-sensitive notion than Victorian critics of religious
> superstition took it to be, we are inclined to agree with William
> James that some theists might well be rationally entitled to their
> religious commitments. Thus we are not disposed to join Sam Harris and
> Peter Singer in impugning the rationality of theists en masse. Like
> Harris and Singer, we would like to say that what worries us about
> militant Islamic theocracy, the new religious right, and church
> opposition to same-sex marriage, but we prefer to do so without using
> the concept of rationality as a club."
>
> Why does pragmatism lead Stout and Rorty to want to drop rationality
> as a way of distinguishing believers from nonbelievers?
>
> If "some theists [and presumably then not others] might well be
> rationally entitled to their religious commitments," how do we tell
> which ones are rationally entitled and which ones are not?
>
> Best,
> Steve
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>