Circularity of belief systems

[bunny]

Arising from another thread, though it has come up from time to time.

I claim that any basis of a belief system must be circular. Most atheists have adopted as an axiom something like:

The best way to form true beliefs is to only adopt those which can be rationally defended with reference to all the available evidence.

You will not be able to demonstrate that this axiom is true, since to do so would involve relying on rational argument and would be question-begging. However, I think the atheist can just shrug and say this axiom is self-evidently true (like all good axioms [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]). Theists can likewise not defend an axiom like "The bible is the word of God" and it becomes a contest between axioms - which should be accepted by the skeptic?

I think atheists often try and claim they have no assumptions and that this is what distinguishes the two positions. I think it is more helpful to ask "Which axiom is better?" and I dont think any atheist is going to feel particularly threatened by this.