I have read some of the sequences and such but—I guess I’m a rationalist at heart already, maybe because I’ve studied lots of logic and such, but a lot of it of the basic stuff seemed pretty apparent to me. I was already up to speed on Bayes and quantum mechanics, for example, and never considered anything other an atheism. And I already optimize and try to look at life in terms of expected payoffs and other very rational things like that. But, it’s possible I’ve missed a lot of the material here—I find navigating the site to be pretty unintuitive.
Be very careful thinking you are done. I was in pretty much exactly the same position as you about a year ago. (“yep, I’m pretty rational. Lol @ god; I wonder what it’s like to have delusional beliefs”). After a year and a half here, having read pretty much everything in the sequences and most of the other archives, running a meetup, etc, I now know that I suck at rationality. You will find that you are nowhere near the limits, or even the middle, of possible human rationality.
Further, I now know what it’s like to have delusional beliefs that are so ingrained you don’t even recognize them as beliefs, because I had some big ones. I probably have more. There not easy to spot from the inside.
On the subject of atheism… I used to be an atheist, too. The rabbit hole you’ve fallen into here is deep.
The Seattle guys are pretty cool, from those I’ve met. Go hang out with them.
Okay, sure. Rather I mean: I feel like I’m passed the introductory material. Like I’m coming in as a sophomore, say. But—I could be totally wrong! We’ll see.
And, if we’re pedantic about things pretty similar to atheism, I might not be an atheist. I’m not up to speed on all the terms. What do you call:
I don’t ‘believe’ anything, I have degrees of thinking information might be accurate but I talk as though I believe the best model I have; physics provides a model of the universe which I accept to a high degree and I think it’s very likely accurate as an abstraction (the finer points are up for debate); I make and accept no claims about things that can’t be covered by that model such as extra-universal entities or the reason we exist at all; I consider the elegance of a model as working to its merit as well as its accuracy so invoking supernatural or arbitrary forces where there’s an alternative makes an explanation very implausible to me; I see no reason to invoke anything other than physics anywhere between the “big bang” step and my perception of the present so my currently preferred explanation excludes anything supernatural in any form.
My test was whether my gods-related beliefs would get me flamed on r/atheism. I don’t think my beliefs would pass the ideological turing test for atheism.
I used to think the god hypothesis was not just wrong, but incoherent. How could there be a being above and outside physics? How could god break the laws of physics? Of course now I take the simulation argument much more seriously, and even superintelligences within the universe can probably do pretty neat things.
I still think non-reductionism is incoherent; “a level above ours” makes sense, “supernatural” does not.
This isn’t really a major update, though. I’m just not going to refer to myself as an atheist any more, because my beliefs permit a lot more.
Be very careful thinking you are done. I was in pretty much exactly the same position as you about a year ago. (“yep, I’m pretty rational. Lol @ god; I wonder what it’s like to have delusional beliefs”). After a year and a half here, having read pretty much everything in the sequences and most of the other archives, running a meetup, etc, I now know that I suck at rationality. You will find that you are nowhere near the limits, or even the middle, of possible human rationality.
Further, I now know what it’s like to have delusional beliefs that are so ingrained you don’t even recognize them as beliefs, because I had some big ones. I probably have more. There not easy to spot from the inside.
On the subject of atheism… I used to be an atheist, too. The rabbit hole you’ve fallen into here is deep.
The Seattle guys are pretty cool, from those I’ve met. Go hang out with them.
Don’t be mysterious, Morpheus, please elaborate.
Okay, sure. Rather I mean: I feel like I’m passed the introductory material. Like I’m coming in as a sophomore, say. But—I could be totally wrong! We’ll see.
I’ve definitely got counter-rational behaviors ingrained; I’m constantly fighting my brain.
And, if we’re pedantic about things pretty similar to atheism, I might not be an atheist. I’m not up to speed on all the terms. What do you call:
I was calling that atheism.
In that sense, then, I’m an atheist.
My test was whether my gods-related beliefs would get me flamed on r/atheism. I don’t think my beliefs would pass the ideological turing test for atheism.
I used to think the god hypothesis was not just wrong, but incoherent. How could there be a being above and outside physics? How could god break the laws of physics? Of course now I take the simulation argument much more seriously, and even superintelligences within the universe can probably do pretty neat things.
I still think non-reductionism is incoherent; “a level above ours” makes sense, “supernatural” does not.
This isn’t really a major update, though. I’m just not going to refer to myself as an atheist any more, because my beliefs permit a lot more.
Seems like agnosticism to me, or atheism in a broader sense. The narrow atheism is a belief in zero gods.