Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
There are ultimately two worldviews: Theism/Deism and Nihilism.
The essential characteristic of Theism/Deism is that the universe was created purposefully, and humans can understand it to some extent.
"The creation of the universe was an intentional act."
The essential characteristic of Nihilism is that the universe was NOT created purposefully, and there is no reason to think that we can understand it.
"The universe was not intentionally created."
I think we've had this discussion before, you should change your mind here because you are clearly wrong. Yes, if you accept a Cartesian standard of "is it possible to doubt this conclusion?" then you will not be able to justify knowledge or morality as either a theist or an atheist. So you are forced to either (1) use a different standard, (2) accept beliefs about which you are uncertain, or (3) accept skepticism and nihilism.
Theists use either (1) or (2) to justify their beliefs in knowledge and morality. So do atheists. Then atheists accuse theists of using faith (i.e. some version of (2)) to justify their beliefs - because they are. Then theists accuse atheists of using faith (i.e. some version of (2)) to justify their beliefs in knowledge and morality - because they are as well.
Now, some village atheists don't like to admit this because they think faith is bad, but this is usually due to an insufficient grappling with the skeptical arguments of Descartes, Hume, and later philosophers. More thoughtful atheists will admit that there is nearly always a chance they are wrong (this includes New Atheists likes Dawkins and Harris fwiw). And of course some accept skepticism and nihilism.
Now, you want to come along and say, hey if you use the Cartesian standard of knowledge you can't (as an atheist) get past nihilism or skepticism. True! Also true for theists though. Theists get around this by using (1) or (2). Why can't atheists as well? You never say, because they clearly can.