In December 2014, over 2,800 atheists responded to a challenge to rewrite the Decalogue (Ten Commandments) with modern, humanist alternatives. After collating and condensing the submissions, thirteen judges voted on the top ten atheist Ten Commandments – or perhaps to avoid the hierarchical implications of the word, we ought to call them Suggestments. I would like to offer a few, brief observations to this list, which aren’t so much chiseled into immutable stone as they are finger-sketched into the sand at low tide. The original CNN article can be found here.
Be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence.
There are three functional words in this commandment. First, open-mindedness is a decent idea, as far as it goes. Considering all reasonable scenarios is a good way to see the pros and cons of a proposition, and use our God-given reason to determine where truth nests. Openmindedness, however, is insufficient unless there is a commitment to eventual close-mindedness. As Chesterton said, “Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” Leaving the mind in a perpetual state of yawning is to place food in the mouth without ever chewing. Truth is a reduction of all possible scenarios to the most likely; the wave function of open-mindedness collapses into a singular, measurable reality. For any belief to take shape, open minds must end in closed minds. The Bible calls this phenomenon “ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7). The mind that believes an open mind is good is a mind that has closed its mouth around this belief.
Second, an open mind must be willing. Note the verb. Will must be employed to alter a currently held belief. Intellectuals like to see themselves using Spock-like reasoning to adopt dispassionately the most likely solution; load relevant facts into my pre-frontal cortex and I will spit out a conclusion. This is not how humans work. We are not cold, computation machines. Without an emotional connection to an answer, we would stand paralyzed in indecision in the breakfast cereal aisle. This means we not only have to be willing but must want to be willing. Most atheists I know are very angry at the God they don’t believe exists, and this anger leaves the will inert to accept God as a possible conclusion. It is not a mind problem, it is a heart one. We are far more willing to intentionally disbelieve facts we emotionally do not like than override our emotions to accept an unpleasant reality. A strong stigma will trample a solid dogma any day of the week.
Lastly, evidence. Before one can consider the evidence of a proposition one must also acknowledge what counts as evidence. Modern man consigns epistemological certainty to the small realm of empiric evidence – what is detectable to the senses. While very valuable to humanity, empirical knowledge is extremely limited in what kind of questions it can answer, including the question “Is it good to be open-minded?” You cannot put this question on a Bunsen burner, measure its mass, or hear what kind of sound it makes when you drop it on the floor. Indeed, no meaningful question as it pertains to what it means to be human can be answered empirically.
Thought Butter 