The Burden of Probability

If you claim something is true and intend to convince others, you have the burden of proof.

If you claim something is likely and intend to convince others, you have the burden of probability.

A strong theist, one who claims God exists, would have the burden of proof when engaged in debate. A strong atheist, on who claims God does not exist, would also have the burden of proof when engaged in debate.

A weak theist or atheist, those who claim the existence of God is likely or not likely, has the burden of probability when engaged in debate.

Weak theists and strong atheists are rarer breeds than strong theists and weak atheists, so it is accurate to say that it's more common for theists to have a more rigorous burden on their hands.

There is no inherent burden to any personal belief, just don't expect it to be meaningful to anyone else without accepting the burden to satisfy reasonable skepticism when engaged in argument.

Apologetics: The Second Best Defense

The Church of the Pigskin

Football season is upon us! (American, not soccer) I love this time of year. It is a time to gather with friends and share the common experience of rooting for your team. It's infectious.

I hope this confession doesn't revoke my man-card, but I didn't get into sports spectating until college. A big reason for this is because I was never that in to sports performing either. A combination of laziness and anti-social behavior kept me in my shell until the needed quantity of Jack Daniels and fellowship was applied. At the University of Georgia, it was near impossible to not identify as a "dawg." I rooted for Georgia because everyone rooted for Georgia. It was the culture and I fucking liked it.

The college football culture is so strong in the south that whenever someone says "I'm a Georgia fan" or "I love Alabama" or "Let's go Florida" it is understood that they aren't talking about the state--they are talking about the universities, more specifically the athletic programs. This may not be a ringing endorsement for the region at large, but the conversational fact is that one's sports team is often indistinguishable from one's location. Hell, this time of year, it's one's identity.

Oh, wait, this is an atheist blog, right?

It occurs to me that people's obsession on this or that team relies on one of two factors the vast majority of the time. You root for team "X" because you either are geographically located near team "X" or your parents root for team "X." What do you think the percentages are that the same two factors play a heavy role for religious preference? Do most people you know practice the same faith as their parents? That may be anecdotal evidence, but statistics show this as well. It's impossible to argue that Hinduism isn't primarily practiced in Indian. Muslims and Christians have spread out some, but stick together just the same. "Jewish" as a term is so intrenched in cultural heritage that it identifies ethnicity every bit as much as faith. And I thought sports franchises and locations were interchangeable, Judaism has taken it to a whole new level.

You probably think it's silly for me to say that the Georgia Bulldogs are the objectively right team, but that is what the religious are saying. It's important to consider that belief in Jehova, Yahweh, Allah, or Vishnu is more dependent on convenience than correctness. If you have to believe in something, make it the dawgs!