“We have a right to accept what we are powerless to reject.”
Fred Dretske, “Entitlement: Epistemic Rights without Epistemic Duties?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, p. 598).
If it occurs to a believer in a consistent manner and is from genuine conviction that reality entails something extra or volitional, then the believer is justly entitled to a belief he may name “God”.
If it occurs to a skeptic in a consistent manner and is from genuine conviction that reality doesn’t entail something extra or volitional, then the skeptic is justly entitled to a belief he may name “Atheism”.
That is, in both cases, where conviction is not akin to personal desire or credulity but to convincing, irresistible persuasion.
This is one reason I love Philosophy in that through its study, we soon find out that most involved in “The Great Debate” are simply ignorant, else they wouldn’t bother debating. It also immediately identifies to you those most despicable souls who do know better but profit off of the ignorance of others; William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel, Frank Turek, Ravi Zacharias, R.C. Sproul, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Neil deGrasse Tyson.
