Does the possibility of unknown phenomenon justify consideration of the existence of a god?

One of the cool things about atheism is that an atheist is free to be entirely skeptical about their atheism. Unlike faith-based beliefs where certain postulates must be assumed to be true (most commonly the existence of god and extra-physical consciousness) and evidence to the contrary largely ignored before any further consideration is possible, an atheist can be entirely open to the possibility of the existence of a god-like creator entity just as they can be entirely open to the revision of scientific theories. Our universe is complex and may indeed be several dimensions larger than we realize which could leave ample room for god to exist (the universe is, by definition, everything that exists; if god exists he must exist in the universe. Any arguments to the contrary are red herring arguments of semantics). However, there is exactly zero hard evidence supporting the existence of any given god. There is even less evidence of a much broader concept of ~”some kind of sentient higher power” which would require an even more fundamental kind of proof than that required to prove better defined claims of godhood. But does the openness to the possibility of the existence of unknown phenomenon justify considering specific phenomenon when making decisions even when there is no evidence these things exist at all?

Consider the following analogy:
Given world-wide shipping and the tenacity of Arthropods it is entirely possible that no matter where you live and given any typical means of storage there may be highly venomous spiders in your shoes when you go to put them on the in the morning (If this idea doesn’t cause you concern go watch the movie Arachnophobia). For most people the probability is low but the possibility is entirely supported by evidence and you don’t know for sure until you check. Most people do not check their shoes for spiders every morning. If a typical person were to inspect their shoes for spiders every morning we would call them insane for being concerned about something so unlikely to happen. There is infinitely more evidence to suggest there may be spiders in your shoes than that there might be a god. We should worry about the existence of god infinitely less than the existence of venomous spiders in situations known to generally be safe.

Consideration of the existence of a god is not warranted by lack of evidence. Lack of evidence either way being considered evidence in itself is classic self reinforcing delusion, not logic. There is no hard evidence to suggest that it’s even possible for an entity meeting any of the popular meaningful definitions of “God” to exist. Proving that the universe has more than four dimensions, an idea that real science is pursuing, might prove that it’s possible for a god to exist. Even if this possibility were proven, giving us a way to at least look for a god, we would then still have to prove that a god does indeed exist in one of those dimensions (proving that it’s possible that there is a spider in your shoes does not prove that a spider is in your shoes). Should evidence supporting a high possibility of the existence of a god come to light we might need to start checking our shoes for god-spiders waiting to bite our unrepentant feet, but until then it is entirely unnecessary. You can still check if you want. You won’t be a bad atheist; just a little bit paranoid.

Tags:

About Jeff