Many  religious folk insist on presenting the debate over the  existence of  their *very* specific worship- and gratitude-worthy God as a debate  about theism vs naturalism. That's a false narrative - do not accept it.   'Naturalism or theism' is a false dilemma - there are many other  options on the table (e.g. you find non-naturalists about maths, modals,  and morals who are not theists, for example; there are also all sorts  of theisms to consider other than the *particularly* implausible  omnipotent omnibenevolent Judeo-Christian God).   Most folks who  reject religious monotheism reject it, not because they're wedded to  scientism, naturalism, or some other philosophical or metaphysical -ism,  but for much the same reasons they're skeptical about fairies, ghosts,  and a flat earth -  they think there's little evidence for, a great deal  of evidence against (e.g. the evidential problem of evil, the problem  of divine hiddenness). They also think there are...
Stephen Law is a philosopher and author. Currently Director of Philosophy and Cert HE at Oxford University Department of Continuing Education. Stephen has also published many popular books including The Philosophy Gym, The Complete Philosophy Files, and Believing Bullshit. For school talks/ media: stephenlaw4schools.blogspot.co.uk Email: think-AT-royalinstitutephilosophy.org