It does not seem to me that there is a rational basis in claiming that there is no God. If the existence of an entity identifiable as a “God” seems improbable, then how should we consider the probability of life existing? We believe in life because we experience it, because it is all around us. Some would say the same of God, though they would obviously not be referring to a man with a beard. The disagreement often seems like a matter of language, where the word “God” is used as a metaphor for something that we all experience, for something that we can not disagree upon. But even when we manage to pull ourselves above this confusion and agree upon a certain definition of “God”, conflicts may remain. This is because there are genuine disagreements on what is “rational” and “irrational”, “true” or “false”, “good” or “harmful”. These disagreements, I find, lack the beauty of tolerance and make a good display of people’s assumptions. It is difficult to have a constructive discussion when we rely on different assumptions and focus on attacking the opposite position rather than understanding it as the other side understands it.

Click here to continue reading »« Click here to hide text