What would it take to change your mind?

In a debate as old as that of religion vs. atheism (however you refer to it), there are many equally old questions and lines of argument from both sides. One of the most common questions comes from the religious side, and it asks, “What would it take to change your mind?”

Side note: it seems like this question is hardly ever put to religious people by atheists. I think that would be an avenue worth exploring.

I’d like to take a look at three possible answers to this question that atheists can and have given:

1. Nothing would make me change my mind.

2. I would change my mind if an incredible miracle happened or if God appeared to me.

3. I would change my mind if God were publicly observable.

The first response is the simplest, and depending on the reason given for it, it may be the best or worst of the three. There are two basic thought processes that could compel an atheist to say that nothing would change their mind and turn them religious (and I apologize for creating yet another list and branching our conversation further).
A. Because I know there are no supernatural things.

B. Because “God” as you describe him, is a logically impossible being that cannot exist.

Reason A is obviously a very bold statement of certainty, and it is the reason that makes answer 1 the worst of the three answers for what it would take to change your mind. It’s also a particularly ironic statement if the person making it calls themselves a “freethinker” or a “skeptic”. Even Richard Dawkins is not so dogmatic in his atheism. He (like many atheists) describes himself as an “agnostic atheist” in the sense that he believes that he could be wrong, but he sincerely doubts it. It’s also worth noting that this answer could be fielded for any question about any subject at all: “Well I just KNOW that I’m right.”

Reason B is a much more rational reason to say that nothing would convince you to believe in the god in question. Of course you couldn't believe in something that is impossible, just as you couldn't believe that some circles are square. One classic reason that atheists cite for the impossibility of God is that omniscience and omnipotence are incompatible in a being.

Now let’s get back to the original question, “What would make you change your mind?” and take a look at answer number 2: “I would change my mind if an incredible miracle happened or if God appeared to me.”

It’s worth pointing out that citing miracles as evidence for the supernatural is simply an “argument from ignorance”, which is a logical fallacy. Even if you see someone walking on water just like Jesus, that’s no more evidence of God than it is evidence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster being bored and messing with you for fun.

But I myself must admit that even though it would be an illogical line of reasoning, there are some miraculous things that, if they occurred, would compel me to believe in God. For example, if all my Christian friends began walking on water, if amputees who prayed to God suddenly regrew their limbs but those who prayed to Allah did not, and if blasphemers against God were being struck by lightning left and right, then you’d better believe I’d change my mind.

Now let’s move on to the third answer, “I’d change my mind if God were publicly observable.” While I don’t think this is a very common answer, it would be a very good one because it cuts to the heart of the issue of determining what’s real and what isn't.

To see why, let’s entertain a thought experiment: suppose you and your friend walk outside and you see a lone tree in the middle of a field. Your friend, however, claims that there’s no tree there. So you go up to the tree and you touch it, confirming that it’s real. Your friend, however, reaches out for it and claims not to feel anything. You see her touching the tree and saying that she doesn't feel anything, and she sees you reaching out at nothing and claiming that you feel a tree. Let’s even imagine that you introduce cameras and start taking pictures, an objective measurement, but still the two of you disagree about what you see.

Now, let’s add a twist: let’s imagine that you invite everyone in the entire world to come look at the tree, and everyone says that there is, in fact, a tree there. Your friend is dropped off at a psych ward, and that’s that.

The point of this thought experiment is to demonstrate that “private observation” as I will call it, does not establish a thing’s existence. Public, objective, observation is the metric we use to determine if something is real: that’s how we humans operate. So saying that God should be publicly visible seems to be a very reasonable standard to hold for what it would take to change your mind.

But as I said at the beginning, this is an ancient question in an ancient debate that will never stop being asked. But I hope you may approach it differently after reading this generalized outline of the question and its common answers.