It’s hard (but NOT impossible!) to prove a negative — for instance, it’s really easy to rigorously prove that 1 plus 1 is NOT equal to 3. That argument comes up a lot from theists when atheists refute their claim that gods exist. Having discussed this too many times and achieving little or nothing in the way of progress, I now just go straight to probabilities….
Almost EVERY claim for proof of existence of gods made by theists has been disproved or debunked as scientific evidence accumulates, and as a result god has become an inhabitant of the gaps where science hasn’t (yet) looked. Some beliefs are just too stupid to even investigate. As a person of science and reason, if concrete, repeatable proof of ANY kind were to emerge for the existence of gods, then I would have to change my view. I’m confident that the continual debunking of religious claims will persist, and that my view will only be reinforced. But how confident? Let me try to give a small example….
Standard Newtonian physics works well on our planet and is the basis of much of how we build our world...but not all of it. That’s because Newton’s physics don’t work at very small scales or very high speeds. Newton’s physics is a macroscopic approximation of Quantum Mechanics. QM says that there is very small but non-zero probability that Newton’s apple could have fallen upward rather down on his head. However, when we’re building things on our little planet, Newton does just fine, and we can ignore the QM possibilities for all practical purposes. Unless we’re building or using very small things, like we do when building Laser diodes for the Internet, when we purposely exploit quantum behaviour, the probability of the undesirable effects can be safely disregarded. As an electronic engineer and chip designer, I now have to consider quantum effects at current process geometries. That said, I’m perfectly happy to take the bet that an apple will always fall toward the Earth, rather than up. That confidence, for me, is 99.999999….% (as many decimal places as you like) high that I’m safe taking that bet.
Now, let’s flip over to the theist side of the discussion…..as I said, most claims for existence of gods are plainly nonsensical, or based on faith, wishful thinking, dogma or fear. None of these claims can stand close scrutiny, and are often shown to be false, or have natural explanations. They are often made by non-scientists, and evince disregard for standards of evidence and proof. My confidence level that any of these claims will ever be proven is infinitesimal...less than 0.000000000...01%. Thus, I’m very happy that my atheism is correctly based on overwhelming probability that gods don’t exist. I’d take that bet, too! Nonetheless, as I said earlier, I would be compelled to change my view if just one, tiny iota of proof emerged. I’m not worried about losing that bet.
Think on this as well...humanity as currently known (H. Sapiens) has been around for about 200000 years, and for much of that time, has used religion as a way of ensuring tribal cohesion and explaining the unknown. We’ve had science and mathematics for a tiny fraction of that time...about a fortieth of it, if you assume 5000 years for science and mathematics. And yet, in all that time, not one single piece of proof for gods has emerged. Worse still for theism, as we developed science and maths, we got better at interpreting the world, and disproving nonsensical claims from theists.
So...the probability of gods is so vanishingly small, even after all this time, that I’m perfectly happy that an atheist stance is reasonable, and is correct. I’d also argue that religion is a huge negative for humanity now, and should be disregarded, and allowed to slide into oblivion, where it belongs. There is now a sizable body of research which leads to the conclusion that religion is a form of brain damage...why am I not surprised?
All that said, humanity persists in the god delusion, and likely will keep on being totally unreasonable despite all the proof that religion is pernicious.
