Thoughts on Atheism

[Epic Beard Man]

God is not the creator of morality as he is the creator of this universe. Morality exists as the evolutionary principle of right and wrong which exists through human beings. God is the indirect result of morality not the Creator of it.

 

[Apologes]

Agreed with everything except the final point.

 

[Curious George]

There isn't one. As a belief, it simply "is". It has proven consistently resistant to either change or reason or even evidence. Its why I'm comfortable describing it as a faith and a dogma because I am self-conscious of it's irrationality.

Good op. Thought I would snag this quote though because it is where I would question your reasoning.

That no god exists is not an unsupported proposition. It is not irrational. And most people who reach this conclusion do not do so because they lack rationality.

Somehow this always boils down to lack of certainty but belief nonetheless equals faith. I do not think it is so. Faith is claiming certainty in the the absence of knowledge. Belief is not that. Therefore to equate a belief that no god exists to faith is not good reasoning.

You cannot choose your beliefs. And an atheists belief that no god exists cannot come from a spiritual connection or apprehension. The consequence of this is that it is not a faith based belief. Rather the reason for your belief is based solely on your knowledge.

A careful dissection of faith should clarify that faith is not a grounding for your atheism (though I say this based only on reading your posts). I suppose that it is possible that you have the belief based not on reason but based on a want for no god to exist; however, I do not think it so.

 

[Curious George]

Atheists have no need to defend atheism. We simply don't believe in gods and have no need for religious rituals, nor priests, nor holy books.

We have every reason to defend it. That no god exists is, given our current knowledge, the best conclusion. The idea that any god exists is not equal to the idea that no god exists.

That some are happy to claim them equally probable so they can wear an atheist badge without discrimination is nothing more than apologetics

 

[blü 2]

Firstly, Atheism is (for me) the explicit rejection of the existence of god. the reason for this is that god is something that is not and cannot be observed, but is instead inferred by an intellectual error.

For years I've thought there are good reasons not to believe gods are real. These days I think the central one has two parts: first, I have no idea what real thing the word 'God' is intended to denote; and second, it appears that no one else does either. (Imaginary gods, gods that exist only as concepts in individual brains, don't count, of course.)

After that it occurred to me that to be an atheist I'd have to know what I didn't believe in, and since I don't, I have to settle for being ignostic.

It's not a dogmatic view. It can be refuted by a satisfactory definition or description of a real god ─ satisfactory in the sense that if we found a real candidate, we could determine whether it were a god or not.

Atheism therefore has the risk of nihilism. If there is no god, because god is a creator, it brings into question the very source of creation. It brings about questions of the nature of meaning and purpose of existence, of our own sense of importance and our role in the universe. This is not an inevitable result of such atheism, but is certainly a factor when realising the necessity for man creating his own values.

If those are problems, I'd say they all have best available solutions, though not everyone will agree, of course.

The 'source of creation', for example, is presently best explained by Big Bang theory and the modeling of events and forces from there to our present understanding of cosmology. The basics of our morality are an evolved set of responses suitable for us gregarious primates. Our own sense of importance would relate both to the individual survival instinct and the evolved necessity for us to relate to our society and to find our place in the peck order. Existence has such meaning as our evolved instincts bring to it, starting with surviving long enough to propagate.

And so on.

 

[FooYang]

You're trying to make more of atheism than there really is. I see no evidence of any god or goddess. Period.....End of story. You seem to want to make more of it than what it is.......

Me too. Until I can see one flying over my house and then have sex with it, I will reject it as just bronze age nonsense.

 

[FooYang]

My problem with Theisms, are that you cannot touch or see these things. You can't have a casual coffee conversation for one, clearly there is no evidence. Also, a being on earth can't be omnipresent either, so God is just illogical altogether. I can't believe religious people are so delusional, just put your God on the examination table and we will poke his pelvis and see what kinds of particles he is made of.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Firstly, Atheism is (for me) the explicit rejection of the existence of god.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

Your syntax suggests you intend "god" as a proper noun (i.e. you explicitly reject some specific god named "God"), but your capitalization suggests you intend "god" as a simple noun (i.e. that you're talking about explicitly rejecting gods as a category).

Which did you intend? Or did you mean something else?

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I see this is an ancient thread, I was going to quote things from it, but I'd feel weird arguing with someone's views of years ago in case anything changed

My problem with Theisms, are that you cannot touch or see these things. You can't have a casual coffee conversation for one, clearly there is no evidence.

Well, maybe the gods don't like typical casual conversations, and might not want to be treated as science experiments. You're talking about a divine force, not some tetris cube or crossword puzzle you figure out. It's something that humans are meant to respect. They are the divine spirits, you are the human.

 

[paarsurrey]

I'm going to share some thoughts on atheism in this thread. I expect it will throw up some unexpected responses because my views on atheism are NOT representative of many atheists on the forum. It may be useful nonetheless to share and see how things go.

Firstly, Atheism is (for me) the explicit rejection of the existence of god. the reason for this is that god is something that is not and cannot be observed, but is instead inferred by an intellectual error. I realise that is not a view widely held on RF, with most atheists professing a "lack of belief" and I respect many differences arise from that.

Second, this particular variety of Atheism is, in a sense, dogmatic and a "faith". There isn't absolute categorical proof for the validity of this view and many would dispute that as a basis for legitimate belief. If all belief is the product of man and is therefore as finite as man's experience, both within their individual lifetime and the historical accumulation of experience. There is no god and no omniscience. There is no absolute standard of truth or knowledge. Much of the problem of scepticism is that is seeks for absolute where there cannot be one. It continues to inherit a belief in absolute conviction from religion, when in fact none is possible. knowledge is finite and imperfect, as a product and a reflection of its human creators.

Third, Atheism entails a worldview and is in a sense a "religion", in that rejecting god means rejecting the idea of creation. If God traditionally performed the role of "creator" of nature, society and morality, these things have to be re-evaluated until we reach an atheistic worldview. Atheism is therefore not a singular isolated statement about whether god exists or not, but is a broader philosophical conception about how man, nature and society exist without a deity.

Fourth, Atheism therefore has the risk of nihilism. If there is no god, because god is a creator, it brings into question the very source of creation. It brings about questions of the nature of meaning and purpose of existence, of our own sense of importance and our role in the universe. This is not an inevitable result of such atheism, but is certainly a factor when realising the necessity for man creating his own values.

Fourth, there is no "a-historical" atheism. one of the things that comes up a great deal when people try to define atheism is they reach for the dictionary. This however fails to take into account that how we define words, logic, standards of truth and knowledge, are all ultimately products of history and are historically relative to the times they live in. There is therefore no "eternal" atheism. atheism has evolved though history and will continue to evolve. people who believe that "logic" validates atheism fail to take into account that logic is also the product of men's minds and of historical evolution. logic is at least in part relative and subjective even if it may have an objective content for understanding the relationship between things and properties.

Finally, atheism means the possibility of self-deification. If man created god, he projected his own humanity into the divine. There is no absolute separation between the "human" and the "divine". In a sense therefore, man can live in the pursuit of an absolute but can never attain it. Man can aspire to be gods, increasing human powers of creation (and destruction) as a source of meaning and purpose. However human being will never become gods in an absolute sense, but the pursuit of a "purer" or "fuller" expression of the meaning of humanity is what is meaningful in life. In creating ourselves, we possess and exercise the divine power of creation.

As any thread on atheism is by definition controversial, I will make a disclaimer that these are my views on atheism and are NOT meant to tell other atheists what they are or believe. Atheism is not a single monolithic idea, but is a conclusion that can be reached by several paths. Most Atheists on RF will do so by a "lack of belief" based on a "lack of evidence" for god and therefore withhold belief. That is not how I understand or experience my own atheism however.

Any Thoughts or Suggestions? Anything you'd want me to clarify?

"Atheism is (for me) the explicit rejection of the existence of god"

And that without any basis from Revelation and or Science.
Is it just a rhetoric from them, please?

Regards