debate-pointsI was a agnostic then a critical thinker then I became an Atheist. To me it was a logical progression. I listen to every Critical Thinking and Atheist podcast I can and there seems to be lots of Critical Thinking groups that dont want to be associated with Atheism.
so Why does ‘critical thinking’ not always lead to Atheism? Does this matter?
Because denial is a very deep river.
Nobody enjoys being caught being wrong, even if you’re just “catching yourself.” It’s very hard to let go of certain cherished, culturally reinforced, deeply ingrained beliefs. Many people are willing to be critical of just about everything, but not that. They’d have to give up too much (community, ritual, certainty, comfort) and it’s often not being replaced with anything equivalent. So if you’re coming to critical thinking as a theist, sometimes that last hurdle is just a little too high.
There's something called "compartmentalization" which allows people to hold beliefs which are actually in conflict with one another. It allows them to only use one of the belief at a time so that they are not forced to recognize the conflict.
So perhaps, while thinking of religion, they don't also engage their skeptical mindset.
This is one way people can avoid Cognitive Dissonance -- without having to give up a deeply ingrained or indoctrinated belief.
There is more than one answer to this question. Let’s start with the nature of skepticism as a whole: there is no shortage of ideas in life that deserve a healthy degree of skepticism. Some skeptical groups are wary of atheists not because they agree or disagree with us, but rather because we do sometimes tend to drown out all of the other topics because of the very nature of religion. (And they do have a point…)
Which brings us to the critical thinking process as a whole: it’s often difficult to completely separate our personal experiences and prejudices from that which we observe, even when thinking critically. Cultural anthropologists wrestle with the personal bias all the time and have to learn to separate their own experiences (and the lens it provides) from their observations of cultures that are completely foreign to them. Now extend that to someone who might have been indoctrinated into the existence and idea if god since before they learned to walk. That’s an amazingly difficult bias to overcome. More likely, their “critical thinking” is going to end up rejecting atheism and seeking out even the most tenuous critiques of our worldview, rather than cast aside their own.
Finally, we must keep in mind that skepticism gives us some conspiracy theories as well. I’m particularly fond of the one that holds that we never landed on the moon, because it is quite creative, moderately compelling, and, to use a technical term, complete bullshit. When you read some of those so-called theories, it does help to remember where our own personal biases might lie. If we didn’t know better or have a better filter for our biases, which conspiracy theories might have some credibility?
Critical thinking is a process of mining existing information for implications. It heavily depends on the quantity, and quality, of information that is being fed into it.
Check out Aumann's agreement theorem - if you have two people who are equally capable at thinking rationally, and who both have the same information available, they cannot help but agree. In the case of disagreement, there is probably a difference in either the ability to apply the tools, or in the information available.
Critical thought, or critical thinking, in your question seems to be some kind of stage for you in between agnosticism and atheism.
For most people, critical thinking is a skill they choose to exercise.
In your experience it appears that agnosticism lead to atheism with an intermediary stage of critical thinking in between. But I assume you didn’t abandon critical thinking when you became an atheist. It seems likelier that there is no intermediary in most cases, and that the degree of life’s assumptions people offered up to critical thought simply increased with agnosticism being the beginning of the progression and atheism the (supposed?) end.
Anyway, not all people want to scrutinize their lives, or feel the intellectual nagging to do so, and are not externally compelled; thus critical thinking does not cause atheism.
The effect you see is one of pragmatism. Many critical-thinking groups are focused educating the public; imparting skills when possible, and at least providing valuable information.
Should these groups openly identify with atheist positions, two things happen. First, much of the audience has a very strong emotional tie to their religious beliefs, and will simply not be open to arguments that come from an “out” atheist individual or organization. That would undermine the groups’ goals.
Second, there are many atheists who are passionate and outspoken, and when a skeptic or critical-thinking group doesn’t take steps to stay away from the question of gods, those atheists often quickly dominate the conversation. There are plenty of places to discuss atheism, so many skeptical groups simply stay away from the topic, focusing on things that don’t get as much attention.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.