I THINK ABOUT GOD - WHY TO
BELIEVE, WHETHER TO BELIEVE, BUT THE QUESTION "WHY BELIEVE
IN GOD?" CAN TAKE TWO FORMS. THE FIRST, OF COURSE, IS WHY
BELIEVE THERE REALLY IS A GOD? HERE, WE DEBATE REASONS AND
ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THE EXISTENCE OF A SUPREME DEITY. THE SECOND, MORE PERSONAL,
IS WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE IN GOD, OR EVEN, DO I WANT
TO BELIEVE IN GOD? HERE, WE EXAMINE OURSELVES;
DISCERN OUR DEEPEST FEELINGS. THEY'RE RELATED, SURE - IF THERE
IS REALLY A GOD, THEN I SHOULD REALLY BELIEVE IN GOD. I'VE DWELLED FOR DECADES ON
REASONS AND ARGUMENTS DEFENDING AND ATTACKING THE
CLAIM THAT GOD EXISTS. I NOW SHIFT TO BELIEF. THIS IS NOT MY WORLD AND
I AM UNEASY ENTERING IT. WHY BELIEVE IN GOD? I'M ROBERT LAWRENCE KUHN, AND
CLOSER TO TRUTH IS MY JOURNEY TO FIND OUT. I REMAIN AMBIVALENT WITH
REASONS AND ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THE
EXISTENCE OF GOD. SO, HERE'S MY PROBLEM: I'M TOLD
THAT TO KNOW WHETHER THERE IS A GOD, I MUST FIRST BELIEVE IN
GOD, BUT WOULDN'T THAT PUSH ME ONTO A CIRCULAR PATH
OF SELF-DECEPTION? ASKING MYSELF, "WHY SHOULD I
BELIEVE IN GOD?" THROWS ME OFF BALANCE; OUT OF MY COMFORT
ZONE OF REASONS AND ARGUMENTS. I DON'T ENJOY THE VERTIGO,
BUT I DETERMINE TO ENDURE IT. I GO TO LONDON TO MEET SARAH
COAKLEY, PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AT CAMBRIDGE. SARAH IS A SOPHISTICATED,
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGIAN AND A PERCEPTIVE ANGLICAN PRIEST. HOW WILL SHE TAKE TO ME, A
STRUGGLING SCIENTIST, AMATEUR THEOLOGIAN, AND
AMBIVALENT BELIEVER? SARAH, I WILL ADMIT
TO YOU TWO THINGS: ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE IN
GOD; AND TWO, I REALLY DON'T. WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE IN GOD? MY ANSWER TO THAT WOULD BE VERY
DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON WHAT'S MOTIVATING YOU. IN OTHER WORDS, IS IT BECAUSE
YOU FEEL UNEASY ABOUT AN OPTION THAT YOU'VE NEVER
REALLY CONSIDERED? IS IT BECAUSE YOU FEEL DRAWN
OUT OF YOURSELF TOWARDS SOME QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE
EVADED ALL YOUR LIFE? IS IT BECAUSE - COMPLETELY
HYPOTHETICALLY - THERE'S SOME SUFFERING IN YOUR
LIFE THAT YOU FEEL... SOUNDS LIKE I SHOULD
LIE DOWN ON THE COUCH. WELL, I'M VERY RELUCTANT, AS A
THEOLOGIAN AND AS A PRIEST, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS IF IT
WERE ON SOME KIND OF FLAT PLAIN. THERE'S NO PERSONAL
INTEREST INVOLVED. LET ME ANS- LET ME
ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I WOULD LOVE TO BELIEVE IN GOD
BECAUSE THAT WOULD GIVE MEANING TO THE UNIVERSE AND MY LIFE, IT
WOULD GIVE, AT LEAST, THE ONLY POSSIBLE HOPE OF A
LIFE AFTER DEATH. SO, I HAVE EVERY REASON TO WANT
TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE IN GOD,
BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I AM CONCERNED, BECAUSE I HAVE THE
DESIRE, THAT THE END PRODUCT OF THAT WOULD BE GENERATED BY MY
DESIRE RATHER THAN BY REALITY, AND THE LAST THING I
WANT TO DO IS FOOL MYSELF. ABSOLUTELY. SO, WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS
UNDER WHICH YOU CAN CONCEIVE OF BEING DRAWN TO BELIEVE IN
A WAY THAT YOU WEREN'T DUPING YOURSELF. I DON'T KNOW, AND I HAVE SAID
THAT I THINK IF GOD EXISTS, IT'S UP TO GOD TO- TO FIGURE
OUT HOW I CAN BELIEVE. THAT'S WHY I'M COMING TO
YOU; YOU'RE CLOSER THAN I AM. WELL, PERHAPS YOU
SHOULDN'T PRESUME THAT. THAT'S NOT A PRESUMPTION
I WOULD MAKE, ACTUALLY. I'M VERY SERIOUS ABOUT THAT,
BUT THE REASON I PRESS YOU ON, WHAT DO YOU SEEK? THAT'S A VERY OLD QUESTION ASKED
TO MONKS WHEN THEY COME TO THE MONASTERY, QUID PETIS -
WHAT DO YOU SEEK? BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS THE CORE
QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE AT THE CENTER WHEN PEOPLE SAY,
WHY DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD? BUT THAT'S, THAT'S
IDIOSYNCRATIC, THAT'S JUST ABOUT ME, IT SHOULDN'T BE ABOUT ME. I WANT IT TO BE ABOUT REALITY,
I WANT IT INDEPENDENT- NOW, WHY IS REALITY AND YOU,
SOMEONE SEPARABLE, I MEAN WHY, WHY DO YOU THINK
IT'S A PROBLEM? REALITY WOULD BE REALITY
IF EXISTED OR I DID NOT. THAT IS TRUE. BUT WHY DO THINK THAT REFLECTING
ON YOUR OWN SPIRITUAL STATE AND YOUR OWN DESIRES IS SOMEHOW-- BECAUSE I THINK THAT
WOULD AFFECT MY ANALYSIS OF THE PROBLEM OR,
OR MY DESIRE TO, TO WANT GOD TO EXIST. I DO WANT GOD TO EXIST. ALL RIGHT SO YOU THINK THAT,
SAY IN SCIENCE, YOU CAN INVESTIGATE MATTERS IN SCIENCE,
NOT BRINGING ANY OF YOUR DESIRES OR INTERESTS INTO THE MATTER. WELL CERTAINLY THERE, THERE IS
A PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT WITH ANYTHING IN SCIENCE. BUT WHAT YOU'D HAVE AT THE END
OF THE DAY IN SCIENCE, IS THAT YOU HAVE OBJECTIVE REALITY
THAT IS PRETTY MUCH AGREED TO ACROSS CULTURES. WHICH
YOU DO NOT FIND IN RELIGION. THAT IS PERFECTLY TRUE. BUT YOU SEE, THE REASON I'M
ASKING YOU THIS IS, NOT TO TRICK YOU. THE THING THAT I'M MOST
INTERESTED IN RELATION TO ARGUMENTS FOR GOD'S EXISTENCE
WHICH I DON'T IN ANY WAY SNEER AT, BY THE WAY. IT'S BEEN VERY POPULAR IN THE
LAST GENERATION OF THEOLOGY TO THINK THAT ARGUMENTS FOR GOD'S
EXISTENCE ARE A WASTE OF TIME, AND THAT WE CAN WITHDRAW INTO
OUR KIND OF SECTARIAN REALMS OF RELIGIOUS PRACTICE AND
NOT BOTHER WITH PEOPLE WHO DON'T BELIEVE. THIS SEEMS TO ME A TRAGIC
INTELLECTUAL MISTAKE, BUT ARGUMENTS AS SUCH, IT WOULD NOT
ENGAGE YOU UNLESS YOUR WILL WAS SOMEHOW TURNED TOWARDS THE
REALITY THAT MIGHT LIE THERE BEHIND THEM. AND THAT'S WHY I'VE
BEEN PRESSING THIS 'WHAT DO YOU SEEK?' QUESTION. SO, SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS
THAT, IS THAT IF THERE'S SOME PREDISPOSITION, SOME WILL TO
BELIEVE THAT THE ARGUMENTS FOR GOD WOULD BE RECEIVED
IN A DIFFERENT WAY. EXACTLY. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT SCARES ME. RIGHT. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT SCARES
ME, THAT'S WHAT I DON'T WANT. SO YOU THINK THAT THAT WOULD
BE NECESSARILY A MATTER OF SELF-DUPING? I WOULD WORRY ABOUT THAT. RIGHT. BUT WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS
UNDER WHICH THAT WORRY MIGHT BE RELIEVED? I'M STILL PRESSING YOU I DON'T KNOW. LET'S SAY THAT GOD IS REACHING
OUT TO YOU IN SOME WAY, TO WORK ON THIS, THIS NIGGLE, THIS
NIGGLE THAT YOU HAVE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE IN GOD. AND LET'S SAY THAT THERE ARE
SOME ARENAS OF YOUR LIFE WHICH HAVE A SORT OF ELEMENT OF
VULNERABILITY IN THEM, OF LOVE, OF DESIRE, OF PAIN
WHERE GOD COULD GET IN. UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS DO
YOU THINK THAT MIGHT LEAD TO SOMETHING? I HAVE ALL OF THOSE
AS, AS DOES EVERYONE. AND IF I WOULD BEGIN TO BELIEVE
IN GOD THROUGH ANY ONE OF THOSE WINDOWS, THEY
WOULD MAKE ME NERVOUS. I JUST DON'T WANT TO BE IN A
POSITION OF FOOLING MYSELF OR ARROGATING TO MYSELF
SOME RELATIONSHIP WITH A, A SPIRITUAL, THE SPIRITUAL
REALITIES WHEN SUCH IS NOT THE CASE. YOU SEEM TO BE OPERATING WITH
AN EXTRAORDINARY INDIVIDUALISTIC NOTION OF THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE,
IN WHICH, YOU AND YOU ALONE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
EVERYTHING YOU DO AND THINK. SO, THAT'S AND, SO,
THAT'S ONE PROBLEM I MAY HAVE. AND YES, AND THIS STRIKES
ME AS NOT REALLY TRUE TO ANY OF OUR INTELLECTUAL
ENDEAVORS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE REASON
YOU HAVEN'T GOT VERY FAR IN WHAT YOU SAY IS A DESIRE TO BELIEVE
IN GOD, IS THAT YOU HAVE THIS RATHER STRANGE, ABSTRACT, ARID
VISION, OF A SORT OF, SPACE IN WHICH YOU WOULD BE COMPLETELY
UNCONTAMINATED BY ANY PREVIOUS, AUTHORITATIVE FIGURE. I KNOW, I AM CONTAMINATED,
AND EVERY CONTAMINATION I'VE HAD PUSHED ME IN THE
OPPOSITE DIRECTION. AWAY FROM RELIGION? YES. BECAUSE RELIGION HA- HAS BEEN
RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH NEGATIVE--- FOR A LOT OF REASONS, I'M
NOT ONE TO SAY BECAUSE RELIGION HAS HAD SO MANY
NEGATIVES IN TERMS OF WARS AND PERSECUTIONS, THAT I
REJECT THE FUNDAMENTALS OF RELIGION, I'M NOT OF THAT- SO, YOUR QUEST FOR THE
DEEP REALITY OF LIFE, WHICH SEEMS TO ANIMATE
THESE PROGRAMS, SEEMS TO ME TO HAVE SOME
SPIRITUAL DIMENSION TO IT. YEAH, UH, I MEAN IT, IT MAY NOT
FIND ITS PLACE IN ANY PARTICULAR PRACTICE OF RELIGION
AT THE MOMENT. BUT IT CLEARLY IS AN ITCH, YOU
WOULDN'T BE MAKING ALL OF THESE PROGRAMS IF YOU DIDN'T FIND
THIS A, AN ULTIMATELY FASCINATING QUESTION. IT'S NOT ONLY TO FIND AN ANSWER
BUT IT'S, JUST TO DEAL WITH THE QUESTIONS THEMSELVES. EXACTLY. BECAUSE IF YOU DEAL WITH THE
QUESTIONS THEMSELVES, I FEEL THAT IS ENORMOUS PROGRESS. SO I WOULD WANT TO SAY, OVER
AGAIN, A HUGE NUMBER OF MOVES AND RECENT PHILOSOPHY OF
RELIGION AND THEOLOGY, AGAINST ARGUMENTS FOR GOD'S EXISTENCE,
THAT I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO LAY OUT OR ARRANGE ARGUMENTS,
WHY IT SEEMS TO ME VERY RATIONAL TO BELIEVE IN
GOD, INCLUDING PROFOUNDLY EXPERIENTIAL REASONS, WHICH I
SUSPECT THAT YOU SHARE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN YOU'RE
OWNING UP TO AT THE MOMENT. I JUST HAVE THAT LITTLE FEELING
AS A PRIEST, AND THEN I WOULD SAY LET'S LOOK AT
THESE ARGUMENTS. AND THEN I WOULD ASK YOU THE BIG
EXISTENTIAL QUESTION, WHICH IS, WHERE ARE TRUE JOYS TO BE FOUND? WHICH IS TO CIRCLE BACK TO THAT
QUESTION, WHAT ARE YOU SEEKING? BECAUSE IF THESE ARGUMENTS
SIMPLY ADD UP TO ARRANGE A QUITE ARID, ABSTRACT PROPOSITIONAL
POSSIBILITIES, THEN THEY'RE NOT GRABBING YOU EXISTENTIALLY IN
THE WAY THAT THEY WOULD IF YOU WERE ACTUALLY PREPARED TO PUT
YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE IN TERMS OF PRACTICES. BECAUSE I AS A PRIEST, I AS A
BELIEVER, FIND THAT IT IS IN SILENT WAITING ON GOD, THAT
ULTIMATE TRANSCENDENT REALITY, IMPINGES ON ME. AND EVERY TIME I DO THAT,
I THINK OF IT AS A KIND OF REHEARSAL FOR THE MOMENT WHEN
I FINALLY HAVE TO GIVE OVER CONTROL, WHICH WILL BE
THE MOMENT WHEN I DIE. AND AS A PRIEST, I THINK
REHEARSING FOR DEATH IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS
WE DO AS HUMANS BECAUSE ONCE WE'RE NO LONGER AFRAID OF DEATH,
THEN WE'RE NO LONGER AFRAID OF LIFE. AND YOU STRIKE ME AS A
PERSON WHO'S VERY INTERESTED IN CONTROLLING WHAT YOU BELIEVE
IN FOR FEAR THAT YOU MIGHT FALL VICTIM TO SOME KIND OF CONTEE
AND HETERONOMY, WHERE YOU WOULD NO LONGER BE IN CHARGE, THE
CAPTAIN OF YOUR OWN SOUL, BUT WHEN YOU COME TO THINK OF IT,
THERE'S GOING TO COME A DAY WHEN YOU'RE LYING IN BED ABOUT
TO DIE, AND THAT POSSIBILITY WILL NO LONGER BE A FANTASY
THAT YOU CAN MAINTAIN. SO, PERHAPS WHAT'S A LITTLE
BIT DIFFERENT ABOUT THE WAY I APPROACH ARGUMENTS FOR THE
EXISTENCE OF GOD IS TO THINK ABOUT THE CONTEXT OF DESIRE
TRANSFORMATIVE PRACTICES, AND ULTIMATE LONGING, WHICH
ULTIMATELY I THINK CAN'T BE FULLY TAKEN ACCOUNT OF, IN TERMS
OF TAUGHTING UP THE RELATIVE VALUE OF ARGUMENTS. I APPRECIATE SARAH'S CONCERN FOR
ME, THOUGH I ADMIT A SENSE OF DISCOMFORT, FEELING THE FORCE
OF HER PENETRATING INSIGHTS. REHEARSING FOR DEATH... I DO FEAR DEATH;
SARAH SEES THAT. I SHUDDER AT THE FINALITY OF
UTTER NON-EXISTENCE, I'D WISH TO BE NO LONGER AFRAID. BUT BEFORE I GIVE IN TO EASY
ANSWERS, I SEEK OUT THE OTHER SIDE. AND IN LONDON, WHO MORE
APPROPRIATE TO GRILL ME, THIS TIME FROM AN ATHEISTIC
PERSPECTIVE THAN ANTHONY GREYLAND, THE PROVOCATIVE
PHILOSOPHER AND POLITICAL PARTISAN. ANTHONY I'M SURE SHALL HAVE NO
INTEREST IN MY ETERNAL SOUL. ONLY IN SAVING ME FROM THE
EARTHLY HELL OF IRRATIONALITY, SELF-DELUSION AND FALSE HOPE. ANTHONY I WOULD BE LESS THAN
CANDID, IF I DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES IN MY
LIFE WHERE I BELIEVED IN GOD AND OTHER TIMES WHEN I WAS
CERTAINLY SKEPTICAL. BUT NEVER, NEVER AN ATHEIST. YOU'VE SAID THAT WHETHER IT IS
RATIONAL OR NOT TO BELIEVE IN GOD, IS NOT A GRADIENT, WHICH IS
THE WAY I FEEL MY LIFE HAS BEEN. YOU SAID IT'S ALL OR NOTHING,
SO, HOW DO YOU EVALUATE ME? I HAVE A SUSPICION WHICH IS
THAT UH, PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY'RE STRUGGLING WITH
BELIEF IN GOD SORT OF DO. AND THEY'RE, AND WHAT THEY'RE
DOING IS THEY'RE LOOKING FOR JUSTIFICATIONS. IN THOSE KIND OF CASES I'M
A LITTLE INCLINED TO SAY TO PEOPLE, DON'T USE THE WORD
GOD, USE THE WORD FRED AND THEN, SEE IF IT'S JUST AS CONVINCING,
YOU KNOW, SO FRED CREATED THE UNIVERSE, SO FRED DOES THIS. UH, AND, IT, IT FORCES PEOPLE
ACTUALLY TO THINK UH, ABOUT THAT JUSTIFICATION, AND TO STEP
ASIDE A LITTLE BIT FROM THE NON-RATIONAL, THE EH, NOT
NECESSARILY IRRATIONAL BUT NON-RATIONAL REASONS WHY THEY
MIGHT BE FEEL IMPELLED TO, TO WANT TO BELIEVE. DEFINE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
NON-RATIONAL AND IRRATIONAL. WELL, IRRATIONAL IS, AS IT
WERE CONSCIOUSLY IN THE FACE OF THE EVIDENCE AND IN
THE FACE OF REASON. NON-RATIONAL INCLUDES THAT OF
COURSE BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES ALL THE EMOTIONAL WELL SPRINGS THAT
WE MIGHT HAVE FOR THINKING AND BELIEVING A CERTAIN WAY. SOMETIMES TO STEP ASIDE FROM
WHAT THE EMOTIONAL INCLINATIONS ARE AND YOUR, AND TO TRY TO
SEARCH ROUND THE, THE REASONS WHY THEY HAVE THEM. INSECURITY, FAILURE,
UNCERTAINTY, THE FACT THAT WE KNOW SO LITTLE. WE OCCUPY SUCH A SMALL
PATCH OF LIGHT IN A GREAT DARKNESS OF IGNORANCE. THE, THE, THESE ALL
MOTIVATIONS THAT PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE CLOSURE. PEOPLE HAVE A NARRATIVE IMPULSE,
THEY WANT THE STORY TO BE NEAT, HAVE A BEGINNING AND
A MIDDLE AND AN END. AND UH, YOU KNOW HAVE A
PURPOSE ATTACHED TO IT. THIS IS WHY MINDSET OF SCIENCE
IS SO DIFFERENT FROM THE MINDSET OF A RELIGIOUS COMMITMENT. AND A RELIGIOUS COMMITMENT
THINKS THAT IT HAS A SET OF ANSWERS WHICH ARE
DEEPLY SATISFYING AND PROVIDE A STRUCTURE. SCIENTIFIC MINDSET IS VERY, VERY
HAPPY AND YET IT'S EXCITED, IT DELIGHTS IN THE FACT THAT
WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS. MANY PEOPLE TELL ME THAT IT IS
HOPELESS FOR ME TO TRY TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT GOD
EXISTS, BY RELYING ON ANALYTICAL RATIONAL TECHNIQUES. I MUST HAVE AN EMOTIONAL
RELIGIOUSED EXPERIENCE. NOW, I'VE NEVER HAD ONE. I DON'T PARTICULARLY WANT ONE. AND IF I HAD ONE I
WOULDN'T BELIEVE IT. THE CASE THAT SOMETIMES PUT
BY PEOPLE THAT YOU CAN YOU ONLY REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS TO
BELIEVE BY COMMITTING YOURSELF TO BELIEVE, AND THAT'S JUST
BECAUSE, IN A WAY, YOU'VE ALREADY CONVINCED YOURSELF. IT'S JUST EXACTLY FROM THAT
POSITIONING OF YOURSELF, TAKING THAT ORIENTATION TOWARDS THE
WORLD AND SEEING IT AS IF IT WERE A UNIVERSE THAT HAD A, A
CONSCIOUS, BENEVOLENT MIND IN CONTROL OF IT. WITH THE, UH, PURPOSE IN
VIEW THAT IS PARTICULAR TO YOU. ONCE YOU'VE STEPPED ASIDE FROM
THAT AND YOU'VE LOOKED AT THE UNIVERSE IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT
WAY, YOU CAN HAVE A VERY OPPOSITE FEELING THAT THERE IS
SOMETHING JUST CO, UNIMAGINABLY CRAZY OR, OR POINTLESS ABOUT
TAKING THE RELIGIOUS VIEW. WELL, YOU KNOW, I
WALK WITH YOU DOWN THAT PATH, BUT AT THE END I DON'T
COME TO THE SAME END YOU DO. UH, I'VE OFTEN SAID,
FACETIOUSLY, THAT I AGREE WITH EVERY ATHEISTIC ARGUMENT
EXCEPT THEIR CONCLUSION. WELL, OUR CULTURE OF COURSE, IS
ONE IN WHICH WE ALLOW OUR CHILDREN TO BELIEVE IN THE TOOTH
FAIRY AND THEN FATHER CHRISTMAS AND THEN GOD OR GODS AND THEN
AT A CERTAIN AGE THE TOOTH FAIRY AND FATHER CHRISTMAS TEND TO
VANISH FROM THE SCENE, BUT SOCIETY AS A WHOLE MASSIVELY
REINFORCES THE RELIGIOUS ASPECT. AND SO THAT STONE STAYS IN
THE SHOE, YOU KNOW IT'S ALWAYS THERE. THERE COULD BE SOMETHING ABOUT
OUR NATURE, YOU HAVE TO ASSUME, THAT IS RECEPTIVE TO THAT. WELL, I THINK YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY
RIGHT, THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT US THAT DOES
INCLINE US TOWARDS IT. AND IT IS AN, AN EVOLUTIONARY
THING I THINK, QUITE CLEARLY. IT IS THE EVOLUTIONARY ADVANTAGE
OF CREDULITY ESPECIALLY WHEN YOUNG. WHEN WE ARE KIDS WE HAD BETTER
BELIEVE WHAT OUR ADULTS IN THE ENVIRONMENT SAY BECAUSE OUR
SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT, UH, AND INDEED, THE WHOLE LEARNING
PROCESS WHERE CHILDREN SOAK UP INFORMATION ABOUT THE WORLD IS
PREMISED ON THEIR READINESS, THEIR RECEPTIVITY. AND THAT MEANS THAT THEY'RE
RECEPTIVE TO THE STORIES, THE LEGENDS, AND THE
RELIGIONS ALSO. SOMEBODY ONCE PUT IT BY SAYING A
SPLINTER IN THE MIND WHICH YOU CAN NEVER QUITE DRAW OUT. AND THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES
WHERE IT MIGHT START SPROUTING LEAVES. A STONE IN MY SHOE, A
SPLINTER IN MY MIND. YES, ANTHONY - YOU
GET MY ANXIETY. ANTHONY'S RATIONALITY PROVIDES
BALANCE, AS IF A REALITY COOL GYROSCOPE. SO WHERE AM I? AFTER SARAH'S THEISTIC
DISSECTION OF MY VULNERABLE PSYCHE AND AFTER ANTHONY'S
ATHEISTIC MASSAGE OF MY EMOTIONAL WELL SPRINGS. PERHAPS, I SHOULD IMMERSE
MYSELF IN SOMETHING FRESH. I SEEK FOR A MOMENT A BELIEVER
WHO WAS ROOTED IN SCIENCE. A SCIENTIST WHO WAS
NOT A PURE PHYSICALIST. BUT WHO ALSO DOES NOT SUBSCRIBE
TO TRADITIONAL RELIGION. STILL IN LONDON, I MEET
IMPERIAL COLLEGE PHYSICIST, CHRISTOPHER ISHAN. CHRIS, YOU'RE A PHYSICIST,
A BELIEVER, I, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHY. I OFTEN GET UNDERGRADUATES TOO
EXACTLY COME INTO MY OFFICE AND ASK OF ME HOW CAN YOU AS A
PROFESSOR OF THEORETICAL PHYSICS BELIEVE IN GOD? BUT THAT'S A CURIOUS THING TO
BELIEVE, WHAT'S THAT REALLY SUPPOSED TO MEAN? MANY PEOPLE INTERPRET THIS AS
YOU BELIEVE IN SOME DOGMATIC, PROCLAMATION OF A
PARTICULAR RELIGION. MHMM. THAT ALWAYS SEEMS TO
BE VERY STRANGE. HOW DO YOU KNOW IT'S TRUE? I AM A CHRISTIAN, AT LEAST
I THINK I AM, I'M NOT SURE EVERYBODY WOULD. EACH WEEK WE SAY THE CREED, BUT
IF YOU SAY YOU BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH,
YOU DON'T KNOW THAT DO YOU? YOU WEREN'T THERE. SO BY FIRST NAME NATURE, THAT'S
NOT REALLY A BELIEF IN THE SCIENTIFIC SENSE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
REALIZE THAT; OTHERWISE, IT SOUNDS RIDICULOUS. I MEAN SOME PEOPLE
ALMOST DO TAKE IT LITERALLY. BUT IT'S JUST UH, SPECULATION. IT CERTAINLY I ALSO
BELIEVE I COULD BE WRONG. IF I DO BELIEVE IN A GOD,
I ACCEPT I MIGHT BE COMPLETELY WRONG. SO, I'M NOT DOGMATIC
ABOUT THESE THINGS. WELL YOU SAID THAT YOU DIDN'T
TRUST EXPERIENCE, AND THOUGHT A LOT. BUT I THINK A LOT TOO. I HAVE MORE TRUST
IN MY EXPERIENCE. I WAS BAPTIZED ON MY 40TH
BIRTHDAY, AND NOT BY ACCIDENT. IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO BE
ABLE TO JOIN A CHRISTIAN CHURCH. AND I, AND I ONLY DID IT TO THE
WORK OF KARL HUMAX, IF I HADN'T READ TENSELY WHAT YOU WROTE
ABOUT THESE SORT OF THINGS, I NEVER COULD HAVE DONE IT. SO FOR ME, IT WAS REALLY A
QUESTION OF, WELL, WELL ACTUALLY QUITE DEEP, MYSTICAL EXPERIENCES
THAT I HAD SINCE I WAS ABOUT THIRTEEN,
WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ILLUSION OF
SIGHT; THEY'RE MORE ABOUT NATURE AND MUSIC AND SO ON. AND THROUGH THE WORK
OF THE FIELD I MUST INTEGRATE THESE, AND BE ABLE TO
SAY, TO MYSELF, OKAY, LOOK, I COULD JOIN THE
CHRISTIAN CHURCH. SOME WILL JUST LET
IT, UHM, I THINK, WITHOUT, DOING, YOU KNOW,
BEING IMPOLITE TO THE DEITY, IF IT EXISTS. UH, BUT NONETHELESS, I THINK
IF, I'M NOT SURE EVERYBODY IN MY CHURCH WOULD ACTUALLY THINK
I WAS CHRISTIAN, IF ANYBODY ACTUALLY BELIEVED. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED OVER
THE YEARS QUITE A BIT WITH FOOL-PROOF SCIENCE AND RELIGION
INTERACTION, SOMETIMES WITH, THEOLOGIANS AT
QUITE A HIGH LEVEL. BUT IT ALWAYS SEEMED TO ME
WAS THAT THE WRONG THING TO BE TALKING ABOUT WAS NOT
ACTUALLY SCIENCE AND RELIGION. THE REAL PROBLEM FOR
CHRISTIANITY IS THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING. WHICH IS NOTHING
TO BE SCIENCE PER SE. UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE A
NEUROLOGICAL DISEASE THAT HAS LANDED ME IN THE HOSPITAL
QUITE A FEW NUMBER OF TIMES. AND IT HAS REWARDS OF
INTERESTING PLACES UH, WELL, INTERESTING, YOU SEE,
SUFFERING THERE AT A VERY PROFOUND LEVEL. AN OUTCOME OF ALL OF THIS IS
I FELT A VERY HEART OF REALITY THERE'S SOMETHING, THIS PROFOUND
RUMINATION OF SUFFERING. AND THE QUESTION OF INTEREST IN
RATHER UNIQUE IN THIS BECAUSE SUPPOSEDLY UH, CHRIST WAS
CRUCIFIED ON THE CROSS, SO, GOD EXPERIENCED
SUFFERING IN GOD'S SELF. SO REALLY, FOR ME,
CHRISTIANITY IS NOT ABOUT MY SCIENTIFIC BELIEFS, BUT ABOUT
THIS, MY ONLY PERSONAL ENCOUNTER WITH SUFFERING. TO CHRIS, A FIRST-CLASS
PHYSICIST, THERE IS ROOM IN REALITY FOR PLANES OF
EXISTENCE BEYOND THE PHYSICAL. FOR MYSTICAL EXPERIENCES
BEYOND THE MUNDANE. BUT WHY THE LONG LEAP FROM KARL
YOUNG TO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH? HE SAYS IT'S ABOUT
HIS PERSONAL SUFFERING. I RESPECT PERSONAL SUFFERING,
BUT IS IT THICK ENOUGH TO SPAWN A WORLD VIEW? I TOO FEEL THE NEED, THOUGH
MY REACTION I AM SURE, IS NOT TO JOIN A RELIGION
BUT TO HURRY TO A SKEPTIC. I GO TO LOS ANGELES, TO
VISIT THE PUBLISHER OF SKEPTIC MAGAZINE, MICHAEL SHERMER. MICHAEL, WE'RE FRIENDS, AND SO,
I WILL, IT'S PRIVATE, AND SO I WILL ADMIT TO YOU THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE IN GOD. NOW DO YOU FEEL SORRY FOR ME? I DON'T, NO, BECAUSE MOST OF US
WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE IN GOD. I ACTUALLY THINK THAT THERE IS
A DEEPLY EVOLVED PROPENSITY TO BELIEVE IN SOMETHING ULTIMATE
FORCE, THAT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING. SO, IN THE BELIEVING BRAIN, I'M
TALKING ABOUT PATTERNICITY, THE TENDENCY TO FIND MEANINGFUL
PATTERNS AND RANDOM NOISE, WE JUST CONNECT THE
DOTS TO EXPLAIN THINGS. AND AGENICITY, THE, A TENDENCY
TO IMPUTE INTO THOSE PATTERNS, A HIDDEN AGENT. AN INVISIBLE FORCE
THAT'S RUNNING THE SHOW. I THINK GOD IS THE ULTIMATE
PATTERN AND ULTIMATE AGENT. NOW THE MONOTHEISTIC GOD, THAT
MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE IN TODAY THAT'S FAIRLY NEW ON THE
SCENE IN TERMS OF THE LONG, LONG HISTORY. BUT I DON'T FEEL BAD FOR ANYBODY
THAT, THAT BELIEVES THAT. BUT, YOU, YOU, YOU DON'T WANT
ME TO LIVE IN, IN ERROR MY WHOLE LIFE. I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD BE
INTERESTED IN YOUR FRIEND AS, SEE, TO SEE WHAT'S TRUE. RIGHT, AS YOUR FRIEND WOULD
SAY, I'D PREFER THAT YOU DIDN'T BELIEVE IN SOMETHING
THAT PROBABLY ISN'T TRUE. I THINK THE MORE RATIONAL
SCIENTIFIC WORLDVIEW AT THE VERY LEAST SHOULD LEAD US TO BE
AGNOSTIC, IN THE SENSE THAT YOU CAN'T KNOW. THERE'S NO EXPERIMENT
WE'RE GOING TO RUN. AND SURELY, BY NOW, YOU'VE
INTERVIEWED EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET THAT'S THOUGH ABOUT
THESE THINGS IN A DEEP WAY. THERE IS NO ULTIMATE ANSWER. I WOULD BE SHOCKED AND AMAZED
IF IT TURNED THERE WAS A GOD. I'M FIFTY SEVEN YEARS OLD,
THOUGHT ABOUT THIS MY WHOLE LIFE, I, I WOULD BE,
I WOULD BE AMAZED. YOU ONCE BELIEVED IN GOD, RIGHT? YEAH I DID, I WAS A BORN
AGAIN, EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN. I REALLY BELIEVED, AND WHEN YOU
DO BELIEVE THE, THE WORLDVIEW BECOMES VERY INTERNALLY
CONSISTENT AND UH, AND EXTERNALLY COHERENT. IT ALL MAKES SENSE. NOTHING HAPPENS
WITHOUT A REASON. AND IN A SENSE, THAT'S
COMFORTING BECAUSE UNCERTAINTY IS A LITTLE ANXIETY
PRODUCING, RIGHT? THE ARGUMENTS THAT GET
ME MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE ARE ANTHROPOLOGICAL AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL, SOCIOLOGICAL. ALL THESE DIFFERENT RELIGIONS
AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT PEOPLE BELIEVE IN DIFFERENT
GODS, DIFFERENT ASPECTS. THEY CAN'T ALL BE RIGHT. WHAT ARE THE CHANCES THAT,
YOU KNOW, YOU GOT IT RIGHT AND EVERYBODY ELSE GOT IT WRONG? I MEAN, IF WE WERE
INDIAN, YOU KNOW, SURE. WE, WE WOULDN'T BE TALKING
ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN GOD? THE COULD BE A WHOLE OTHER WAY
OF SUPERNATURAL KINDS OF THINGS ABSOLUTELY, RIGHT. DO YOU REJECT ALL OF THAT? I DO, I'M A MATERIALIST. NOW, IS THERE ANYTHING BEYOND
THE, THE PHYSICAL WORLD AS WE KNOW IT? OKAY, SO THE PROBLEM WITH UH,
POSTULATING THERE MIGHT BE A SUPERNATURAL IS NO DIFFERENT
THAN SAYING THERE MIGHT BE A PARANORMAL. I CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO SUCH
THING AS THE PARANORMAL OR THE SUPERNATURAL;
IT'S JUST THE NORMAL, THE NATURAL, AND THE
STUFF WE CAN'T EXPLAIN YET. AND THE MOMENT YOU SAY,
WELL, OK YOU HAVE THE "X" THE UNEXPLAINED, WHAT IS THAT? OKAY, SO I'M GOING TO
POSTULATE THIS PARANORMAL, SUPERNATURAL EXPLANATION. OH, QUANTUM CONSCIOUSNESS, YEAH. WHAT IF THAT WAS RIGHT? THAT'S NOT PARANORMAL ANYMORE,
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT JUST SUBSUMED UNDER
NEURO-SCIENCE OF PHYSICS RIGHT? THAT'S THE FATE OF
ALL OF THESE CLAIMS. THEY EITHER DISAPPEAR BECAUSE
WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THEM ANYMORE, OR THEY
BECOME PART OF SCIENCE. AND I WOULD EXPAND THAT
ALL THE WAY OUT TO GOD. THAT THE MOMENT YOU, WELL,
OKAY, GOD IS NOT PART OF OUR UNIVERSE, OKAY, THEN HOW
DO WE KNOW ABOUT HIM? WELL, OCCASIONALLY, HE,
HE POKES HIS HAND IN TO STIR THE PARTICLE? REALLY, SO HOW DO
YOU MEASURE THAT? WELL, IT'S A MIRACLE. OKAY, BUT WHERE, WHAT'S THE
EVIDENCE FOR THE MIRACLE? YOU KNOW THAT, AT SOME POINT WE
HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT IN A WAY THAT IS CONCRETE,
WE CAN TEST IT. AND THE MOMENT WE'RE ON THAT
LEVEL, THEN WE'RE DOING SCIENCE AND IT'S NOT
SUPERNATURAL ANYMORE. YEAH, BUT THE FUNDAMENTAL
QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT EXISTS, GOD,
EXTRATERRESTRIAL CIVILIZATION, ANYTHING THAT IS BEYOND THE
PHYSICAL AS WE KNOW IT OR CAN CONCEIVE IT TODAY? WELL, I WOULD HAVE TO
HONESTLY ANSWER IT, I DON'T KNOW, AND NEITHER DO YOU. AND NOBODY DOES, IT
ISN'T POSSIBLE TO KNOW. I DON'T HAVE TO CONSTRUCT A
WHOLE NON-RELIGIOUS, BUT WE IT'S JUST TO SAY I DON'T KNOW. THEN LEAVE IT AT THAT,
IT'S OKAY TO SAY THAT. FOR MICHAEL, CONFLICTING
RELIGIONS UNDERLINE ALL RELIGIONS, AND WHEN HUMAN MINDS
SEEK PATTERNS AND AGENTS, WE BUILD FALSE BELIEFS
IN THINGS SUPERNATURAL. TO ME, HERE'S WHAT'S SURE. HUMANS HAVE A NATURAL COGNITIVE
CAPACITY TO INFER THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, BUT THIS NEITHER AFFIRMS
NOR DENIES THE ACTUAL EXISTENCE OF SUCH A SUPREME BEING. I APPRECIATE BEING PROBED AND
PRODDED BY THEISTS, BY ATHEISTS. EACH GENUINELY
WANTS THE BEST FOR ME. THANK YOU SARAH;
THANK YOU ANTHONY. I THINK THERE MAY BE SOMETHING
BEYOND THE PHYSICAL, BUT I, LIKE CHRIS, COULD BE WRONG. AND EVEN THOUGH I RESIST
MICHAEL'S CONCLUSION REJECTING GOD'S EXISTENCE, HE
ALWAYS MAKES SENSE. WHAT'S FOR ME AND GOD? RIGHT NOW, TO REMAIN WHERE I AM. A STATE OF PASSIONATE,
BEFUDDLEMENT WITH LITTLE HOPE AND NO CONFIDENCE THAT I
WILL SOON SEE THE LIGHT. I HOPE THE PASSION REMAINS. FOR ME, THAT'S CLOSER TO TRUTH.
