In “Nothing” is Not Religious Neutrality, we suggested two competing ideas, A and Z. A and Z are mutually exclusive, and together they comprise the only two possibilities concerning the subject matter. If we disbelieve A, we should believe Z, and vice versa.
Non-belief Does Not Create Neutrality
We discussed how muddled thinking might cause us to confuse this point. We might reject A and thereby adopt Z by default, without evaluating Z on its own merits. In fact, we might come to think of Z as being the neutral position as between A and Z, when it obviously is not.
How? Well we might evaluate A, and reject it, without taking an equally hard look at Z. Instead of choosing an affirmative belief as between the two alternatives, we reject the first belief, and think of it as a “non-belief.” As such, it sounds neutral. But it isn’t, because there were only two choices, A and Z, to begin with. Rejection of one necessarily means acceptance of the other. Accepting one of two mutually exclusive choices is obviously not adopting a position of neutrality between them.
Materialism by Default
Now suppose A stands for theism, and Z stands for materialism. Theism and materialism are mutually exclusive, and together they comprise the only two possibilities for what constitutes the full scope of reality. If we disbelieve theism, we should believe materialism, and vice versa.
Muddled thinking might cause us to confuse this point. We might reject theism and thereby adopt materialism by default, without having evaluated materialism on its own merits. In fact, we would come to think of materialism as being the neutral position as between theism and materialism, when it obviously is not.
How? Well we might evaluate theism, and reject it, without taking an equally hard look at materialism. Instead of choosing an affirmative belief as between the two alternatives, we reject theism and think of it as “non-belief.” As such, it sounds neutral. But it isn’t, because there were only two choices, theism and materialism, to begin with. Rejection of one necessarily means acceptance of the other. Accepting one of two mutually exclusive choices is obviously not adopting a position of neutrality between them.
Materialist Dogma
Non-belief in theism is not the same as neutrality on the question of God’s existence. Non-belief in theism is the same as belief in materialism, and belief in materialism is belief in a set of doctrines that are every bit as dogmatic as those on offer by religions that posit a reality beyond the physical. Materialist dogma tends to go unexamined, however, if we adopt it by default—accepting it only because it is not-theism. Because we can slip into a pattern of thinking that materialism is only “non-belief” in the claims of theism, we may come to conclude that materialism is neutral on the God question, rather than standing in opposition. In that way, we can slide into a default position of materialism, without ever having really examined it.