arguments for atheism

[Keith&Co.]

I'm not sure whether you mean atheism as a lack of belief or the belief in a lack.

Lion treats all atheism as Strong Atheism. False dichotomies get him to his desired conclusions fastestest.

 

[Lion IRC]

No, I've consistently acknowledged and appreciated Dawkins theistic spectrum.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spe...y Richard Dawkins in,the existence of a deity.

I do believe there's a predominance on the internet of presuppositional atheists.
And, yes, I do take issue with atheists who flip flop between definitions - agnostic when it suits them but atheist at other times.

 

[rousseau]

One of the more interesting arguments for atheism I can think of is that 'God' as concept is contingent on the existence of intelligent life - humans. It's only because God has existed in our discourse for so long that the concept is normalized and we don't feel ridiculous even acknowledging it.

But what about a universe where no intelligent life or even life at all exists. Why is God necessary?

Somehow we're still stuck in anthropocentrism where a species that can build pyramids is so fantastic that it must be the central point of the universe.

 

[skepticalbip]

But what about a universe where no intelligent life or even life at all exists. Why is God necessary?

Necessary?

If intelligent life had not evolved to the point that it created Superman and Batman comics then Superman and Batman wouldn't exist.

Is there any reason to think that there is any significant difference between gods and Superman or Batman?

 

[DBT]

In order for atheism to be true, every single religion that has ever existed- every religious claim ever made - must all be 100% irrefutably debunked.

That's a huge burden, a hurdle so high, that one can understand why so many atheists retreat to the intellectual 'safe harbour' of simply calling themselves non-stamp collectors who don't hold any belief about God, let alone certainty.

Consider how much atheism depends on the belief/faith that there's no Higher Life form in this universe or any other, who possesses abilities which humans would consider supernatural/miraculous/incomprehensible. Atheism necessarily also entails the requisite belief that such a Higher Being has nowhere in space/time to exist. Yet modern multiverse cosmology makes the existence of such higher/parallel dimensions of existence increasingly plausible.

Atheism is justified by the absence of evidence for the existence of a God or gods. A lack of conviction in the absence of evidence is a justified position.

 

[rousseau]

But what about a universe where no intelligent life or even life at all exists. Why is God necessary?

Necessary?

If intelligent life had not evolved to the point that it created Superman and Batman comics then Superman and Batman wouldn't exist.

Is there any reason to think that there is any significant difference between gods and Superman or Batman?

Yea that's along the lines of what I'm saying but your analogy isn't very descriptive. More explicitly - we're so far down the road of viewing religion and the supernatural as a normal part of human culture that it's granted a kind of validity even when we try to debunk it. Thousands of years of human culture have set the parameters of the 'debate', which is undergone by people who can't fathom a universe where humans are completely insignificant.

But from the perspective of a universe without intelligent life at some point in time, or no life at all, the whole raison-d'etre of God ceases to exist. Those who believe in God are starting from the assumption that there is something so special about people, and even life itself, that it needed to be brought into existence.

 

[James Brown]

I give you only two choices. They are comically clumsy. If you don’t pick the one that makes me look good, then I will claim you have picked the absurd one that I think is a fantastic argument against you,, but is actually a rather childish caricature of a choice.

My former pastor had a pat question whenever he met someone new. He mentioned it repeatedly during sermons, so you could tell he was proud of it.

"Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior? Or is that something you're still thinking about?"

Nice binary choice. Either you choose the first option--in which case he would invite you to the next church service where you can find out how to become a member. Or you go for Door number 2--in which case he would ask for your contact information so that someone can reach out to "answer your questions about salvation." After all, you said you were thinking about it, so you must be hungry for answers.

He's smart enough to know that there's a third answer--"None of the above." Or even a fourth--"None of your business." But since he didn't ask an open-ended question, the unwary person is pressured to choose Heads or Tails, letting him get his foot in your proverbial door.

 

[James Brown]

And, yes, I do take issue with atheists who flip flop between definitions - agnostic when it suits them but atheist at other times.

I see them as two different modes of thinking, not contradictory at all. One is about the knowledge of god, the other is about belief.

To wit: I don't know if ghosts exist, but I don't believe they do. I don't know if life elsewhere in the universe exists, but I do believe it does.

When it comes to god, I don't know if god exists, but I don't believe so. I'm an agnostic atheist.

Indeed. Agnosticism can be theistic or atheistic. Reportedly the Jewish philosopher Maimonides was an agnostic theist. He believed in god, but maintained that the nature of god was unknowable.

But I agree that some folks call themselves agnostic merely because they don't like the term atheist. They see it as some even-handed moderate view--a misguided view, in my opinion.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I give you only two choices. They are comically clumsy. If you don’t pick the one that makes me look good, then I will claim you have picked the absurd one that I think is a fantastic argument against you,, but is actually a rather childish caricature of a choice.

My former pastor had a pat question whenever he met someone new. He mentioned it repeatedly during sermons, so you could tell he was proud of it.

"Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior? Or is that something you're still thinking about?"

Nice binary choice. Either you choose the first option--in which case he would invite you to the next church service where you can find out how to become a member. Or you go for Door number 2--in which case he would ask for your contact information so that someone can reach out to "answer your questions about salvation." After all, you said you were thinking about it, so you must be hungry for answers.

He's smart enough to know that there's a third answer--"None of the above." Or even a fourth--"None of your business." But since he didn't ask an open-ended question, the unwary person is pressured to choose Heads or Tails, letting him get his foot in your proverbial door.

One is always free to respond, "Save your breath, friend. I'm not into religious nonsense."

 

[bigfield]

In order for atheism to be true, every single religion that has ever existed- every religious claim ever made - must all be 100% irrefutably debunked.

Most religious claims are unfalsifiable. Including yours.

It's impossible to prove that an unfalsifiable claim is false.

You've totally failed to grasp the lesson behind Russell's Teapot and the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

Consider how much atheism depends on the belief/faith that there's no Higher Life form in this universe or any other, who possesses abilities which humans would consider supernatural/miraculous/incomprehensible. Atheism necessarily also entails the requisite belief that such a Higher Being has nowhere in space/time to exist. Yet modern multiverse cosmology makes the existence of such higher/parallel dimensions of existence increasingly plausible.

LOL. This is classic God of the Gaps. M-Theory has 11 dimensions? God exists in those higher dimensions, prove me wrong!

 

[Tigers!]

But from the perspective of a universe without intelligent life at some point in time, or no life at all, the whole raison-d'etre of God ceases to exist.

A universe that has no 'intelligent' life would not think about God (without discussing what 'intelligent' means). That does not automatically mean God does not exist. If God is separate from the universe he created he could make it in any form he wished.

 

[rousseau]

But from the perspective of a universe without intelligent life at some point in time, or no life at all, the whole raison-d'etre of God ceases to exist.

A universe that has no 'intelligent' life would not think about God (without discussing what 'intelligent' means). That does not automatically mean God does not exist. If God is separate from the universe he created he could make it in any form he wished.

God could exist, but God as it exists in human culture implies some kind of sentient being that wanted life, and humans in particular to exist. Why would God be interested in creating a universe with nothing but meteors, black holes, and empty planets?

What I'm trying to say is that the concept of God is anthropocentric - assuming life and humans are central to the universe. These conversations we're having about God are no different from conversations in early centuries about the sun circling the earth. God belief implies intrinsic importance to life itself. But even most atheists haven't gotten around that one yet.

I think what we're really getting at here is whether or not the universe has a cause, and whether or not we know what that cause is. The only reason God comes into it is because of our own egos.

 

[southernhybrid]

You can call me a strong atheist because it's impossible for me to imagine a supernatural entity like a god. It's just too absurd of a claim. Now if you want to refer to nature as god or even love as god, I'm all in. I just don't find any reason or value to think there is an actual supernatural entity out there somewhere. It's too childish. It's too archaic.

It's just something that many or most early cultures used to explain the things that we didn't or still don't understand. It was perhaps an attempt to deny death by inventing the concept of an afterlife. Humans seem to be the only animals who have serious issues with their own mortality.

The silliest explanation for god is when people seem to think that some intelligent life form or entity must have been behind creation. Yeah right! That always begs the question, if the universe demands some powerful, all knowing, supernatural entity to form it, how in the world did this supernatural entity come into existence. Oh right....It always existed. If god always existed, then why can't the universe have always existed.

Belief in god is just a cop out because there are so many things that we don't understand about life. It's so much easier to think that this magical creature simply said.....let there be life....

I hold no grudge toward believers. I don't understand how their brains are able to hold such beliefs without serious doubts, but apparently based on the conversations I've had with those who are willing to discuss such things, they don't seem to understand how the rest of us can be decent, happy people without holding on to such beliefs. That is why I often end up saying.....whatever floats your boat. Life can be hard, and sometimes a bit of mythology helps some cope. I'd rather depend on other people for help and support than an invisible entity that has never been proven to exist. And, at least for me, it's a joy to be able to help others and provide them with emotional support. Why can't we just be good humans? Why do we need magical entities to explain our nature, to forgive us our shortcomings, to guide us, etc. It's just not necessary, but whatever floats your boat, I guess.....

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The silliest explanation for god is when people seem to think that some intelligent life form or entity must have been behind creation. Yeah right! That always begs the question, if the universe demands some powerful, all knowing, supernatural entity to form it, how in the world did this supernatural entity come into existence. Oh right....It always existed. If god always existed, then why can't the universe have always existed.

It's the classic contradiction. Nothing created my magic. My magic has always existed.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I feel the same UNTIL the believers use their beliefs to crusade for an abortion ban, dumb down science curricula, push prayer on kids, insist on prayers at meetings held by supposedly secular governments that are presumed to see all their constituents as equals, treat LGBTQ people as their inferiors, install a mentally ill authoritarian as President...all the while keening that they as Christians are treated so unfairly in the once-great USA.

(In response to southernhybrid's great post above,)

 

[WAB]

In order for atheism to be true, every single religion that has ever existed- every religious claim ever made - must all be 100% irrefutably debunked..

This is false, Lion. As you know, if an entity fitting the description of a god or God exists, then its existence is an objective fact, therefore true. Any other entity's theories about it are irrelevant. Same goes for the non-existence of a god or God. If in fact no entity exists that fits the definition of a god or God, then that is true whether or not any entity can prove its non-existence to another.

 

[ideologyhunter]

The very existence of thousands of orthodoxies -- with mutual exclusivity a common thread -- justifies the atheist position that the common source is man's psychology and imagination.

 

[Lion IRC]

In order for atheism to be true, every single religion that has ever existed- every religious claim ever made - must all be 100% irrefutably debunked..

This is false, Lion. As you know, if an entity fitting the description of a god or God exists, then its existence is an objective fact, therefore true. Any other entity's theories about it are irrelevant. Same goes for the non-existence of a god or God. If in fact no entity exists that fits the definition of a god or God, then that is true whether or not any entity can prove its non-existence to another.

OK Yes, you're right.
Technically that's correct.
A proposition can be true even if nobody has proof or knows that it's true.
+Rep

 

[southernhybrid]

I feel the same UNTIL the believers use their beliefs to crusade for an abortion ban, dumb down science curricula, push prayer on kids, insist on prayers at meetings held by supposedly secular governments that are presumed to see all their constituents as equals, treat LGBTQ people as their inferiors, install a mentally ill authoritarian as President...all the while keening that they as Christians are treated so unfairly in the once-great USA.

(In response to southernhybrid's great post above,)

Yes, you're right. I think that type of believer is a potential threat to the rest of us. Fortunately, not all believers want to make their personal moral beliefs part of government. Those who do are basically supporting a theocracy, as long as that theocracy is one based on their own religion. There are many believers who realize that one's personal morality has no place in a secular government.

Not to be too political, but I've known people who weren't religious who supported Trump for other reasons, and I've known very conservative Christians who still support the separation of church and state. Some of them are or were in my family.

But, yes. There is still public prayer in places. At least it's mostly been removed from public schools, which my evangelical Christian parents supported back in the day. That was when most Christians realized the value of SCS. It protected them from being forced to be controlled by the beliefs of religions that they did't accept. Too bad there are so many Christians these days who don't realize the value of SCS.

Now back to our discussion on atheism and why it doesn't take any faith to be an atheist. Perhaps the word faith is just a confusing one for some people.

 

[Lion IRC]

The word faith is applicable to the atheist who believes something with respect to the existence/non existence of a Higher Being.

You either believe or you know.

Do you know that the universe has always existed? Do you know there is no such dimension of space/time as the one which theists refer to as the afterlife? Do you know with certainty that its impossible to turn water into wine?