One of the core principles of rationality is an ability to update your beliefs based on new evidence. Thus a good heuristic for a person's intellectual honesty, or rigor, is whether they've stated conditions which would lead them to change their beliefs. A rational person in favor of social promotion, for instance, should be willing to change her mind if evidence shows that social promotion is damaging to the schools where it's practiced. Reading through Eliezer Yudkowsky's FAQ page today got me thinking about what evidence would convince someone to change his mind about religion. If I was an atheist I would consider the ability to read my thoughts or determine information that I've never shared with anyone as good evidence, but then it's possible that technology will develop to the point where we can read minds easily. Maybe the ability of a prospective deity to answer scientific or historical questions that we don't have answers to in a logically consistent way, or the ability to control nature, cleave a playing card with a thunderstrike or something. Those aren't great tests, and they're also vulnerable to a jump from, "I can't explain this event" to "an all-knowing or all-powerful being must have done it." What evidence would a rational religious person have to accept to believe that there is no god? I'm not really sure, as much of religious belief is based on faith. I suspect you could get a good answer by asking people why they believe in their god and not in, say, Thor or Zeus.

Liked what you read? I am available for hire.