and he misrepresents typical atheism when claiming it categorically denies possibilities. (I disbelieve in gods, that doesn’t mean various god ideas aren’t possible.)
Our minds in general entertain plenty of possibilities. They’re saturated with them. We say it’s possible the earth is flat or there was a pedophile ring under a pizza place (that has no basement).
What is needed (and yes he mentions this, but promotes possibilities much more) is a greater tendency to use rational mechanisms of error removal/correction in our minds to LIMIT the possibilities we are willing to accept. Religions typically have no reliable error correction mechanism. And Trump’s error correction is utterly unreliable/faulty: it’s based on loyalty.
Possibilities are endless. But the false ones far outnumber the true ones. *Truth is what you are left with after you use rational methods to filter out the junk in that infinite possibility space.* Yes, he does mention this, but I think our lack of rational filtering is our great weakness and is the thing that should be emphasized, not our embrace of the vast space of possibilities that we apparently have little difficulty accepting anyway, which is why so many people believe things that are bunk.
= new reply since forum marked as read
