The main problem for atheism is that reason ends up getting treated as a comprehensively-obligating theistic mind-god, complete with various proof-textings of an invisible inference engine.
Kinda like an ultimate personal mind. How do you question that similarity?
Doesn't seem resolvable without repeating the use of reason to supervise the issue, as if it has mind-obligating and mind-directing powers in spite of the denial of its clearly theistic characteristics in all aspects of our thinking.
What would reason tell you?
Kinda like an ultimate personal mind. How do you question that similarity?
Doesn't seem resolvable without repeating the use of reason to supervise the issue, as if it has mind-obligating and mind-directing powers in spite of the denial of its clearly theistic characteristics in all aspects of our thinking.
What would reason tell you?
