Common misconceptions about atheism

[Mijoy2]

EnterTheBowser:

I hope all that went some way towards answering your question. And incidentally - most atheists do not desire, hope, nor have faith that God exists, and it would probably puzzle them why you think it strange that they do not. But this does not mean that they are absolutely certain of their atheism.

Thanks for the explaination. It would appear there is a continuim of degree-of-belief. Everyone falls on the line somewhere with few at the extremes. Much like nearly everything else in life.

I find the definition of the word, belief, to be sketchy at best. Whenever I hear the evangelical state, “do you believe Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior”, I want to say, “please define believe”.

I believe OJ was probably guilty,
I beleive a man actually walked on the moon,

Yet if I had to bet all my lifes savings on the truth of these matters as they were revealed, I’d have to admit to having sweaty palms and trembling knees at the moment of revelation.

 

[JohnPaul0]

EnterTheBowser:

I’m here for a few reasons. I want to make sure that my beliefs are correct, or at least reasonable - especially since this is a mildly important question. I also enjoy debate in general and these sorts of debates in particular.

Okay, Browse, we’re getting somewhere. Your beliefs about what? The two propositions that you originally posted, or the 800 lb gorilla of whether God exists?

http://www.gorilla.org/images/Meet_Koko/highlighted_photos/rotate.php

 

[Pug]

EnterTheBowser:

I guess the idea was that if an atheist knowingly denied God because they didn’t like the thought of something larger than themselves

Perhaps my fault in understanding is that I find it hard to imagine being unwilling to accept something larger than oneself. I’m not talking about God! It could be anything…family, society, truth, whatever. I have never met someone entirely self-centered (though, I’ve wondered about a cousin of mine). Do you deny something larger than yourself?

Just as a note - I am an atheist.

No, I got that you were an atheist. I showed up on this thread because I am often puzzled by the things people say to atheists. What I said reflects my wrestling with their underpinnings more than anything else.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

StCsDavid:

Fair 'nuff.
Consider this parable. A horrible disease breaks out upon the world that kills people in a matter of days. Millons of people die. Fear and panic set in. Then one day, a doctor discovers a cure for the disease. He shares how to make this with CDC and WHO and every other health organization. Eventually, the vaccine is distributed world wide and people begin to get innoculated. Despite this apparent cure, about 10% of the population refuses to get the shot that will keep them healthy. They believe either they won’t get sick, or that if they do, they can cure themselves. I’m fascinated by the source of this distrust. What causes this inability or lack of desire to see beyond one’s own logic?

Why do people act unreasonably? I’ve got no idea. Why do people believe whatever it is that they believe? Don’t know that either. Psychoanalysis is (in my opinion) not deserving of the title “science.” I try not to speculate about the motives behind belief.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

JohnPaul0:

Okay, Browse, we’re getting somewhere. Your beliefs about what? The two propositions that you originally posted, or the 800 lb gorilla of whether God exists?

http://www.gorilla.org/images/Meet_Koko/highlighted_photos/rotate.php

The gorilla, generally. I suppose I started this thread to, well, clear up some common misconceptions about atheists, since I am an atheist and it vexes to see them and myself defamed by people ignorant on the particular issue they are vocing their opinion on.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

Pug:

Perhaps my fault in understanding is that I find it hard to imagine being unwilling to accept something larger than oneself. I’m not talking about God! It could be anything…family, society, truth, whatever. I have never met someone entirely self-centered (though, I’ve wondered about a cousin of mine). Do you deny something larger than yourself?

No, not really; I do believe there’s more to life than what is economically rational for me. What that is… I don’t know. I will admit that I am uncertain what the “meaning of life” is, or what the proper way to live one’s life is; until I get a clearer idea, I just try to be a virtuous person.

No, I got that you were an atheist. I showed up on this thread because I am often puzzled by the things people say to atheists. What I said reflects my wrestling with their underpinnings more than anything else.

dumspirospero:

…

I don’t believe atheist are angry with God…I feel they are narcisistic people who believe they are above God or do not need God…they are their own God…crowned with their own Diadem if you will.

This is the sort of belief I am hoping to shed some light on. Are atheists narcissistic egoists? Most of the ones I have met - no.

 

[Pug]

EnterTheBowser:

I will admit that I am uncertain what the “meaning of life” is, or what the proper way to live one’s life is; until I get a clearer idea, I just try to be a virtuous person.

Makes sense to me. Perhaps a question that could be asked then is, what standard does one’s virtue follow? Naturally given what you have said, it might be a provisional standard for now.

 

[JohnPaul0]

EnterTheBowser:

The gorilla, generally. I suppose I started this thread to, well, clear up some common misconceptions about atheists, since I am an atheist and it vexes to see them and myself defamed by people ignorant on the particular issue they are vocing their opinion on.

Well, let me assure you that you won’t get any defamation in this forum. No, we’re all perfect, enlightened Christians, right folks?

For the matter at hand (whether or not God exists), the argument of the Primer Mover has always been a good one for me. I’m sure that you must be familiar with it. How does it sit with you?

 

[EnterTheBowser]

JohnPaul0:

Well, let me assure you that you won’t get any defamation in this forum. No, we’re all perfect, enlightened Christians, right folks?

For the matter at hand (whether or not God exists), the argument of the Primer Mover has always been a good one for me. I’m sure that you must be familiar with it. How does it sit with you?

If it’s all right with you, I’d prefer to discuss that sort of question in a different thread and keep this one somewhat focused. If you’d like to discuss it and don’t feel like wading through the 900 post long “There is no God” thread, feel free to start a new one - I’ll respond.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

Pug:

Makes sense to me. Perhaps a question that could be asked then is, what standard does one’s virtue follow? Naturally given what you have said, it might be a provisional standard for now.

Ever heard of virtue ethics?

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

BOWSER

There are no atheists in foxholes."

This one simply is not true; and furthermore it is fairly easy to show it to be so. And the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers is rather good such evidence.

It is not easy to show that it is so. On the contrary, the most universal foxhole is the deathbed. Sooner or later, everybody is in that foxhole. I know of many atheists who have begun to pray at the hour of their death. You may say that this is not a rational response to facing death. But Pascal was a great mathematician and logician, and thought it was the most rational response possible.

After all, what has the atheist got to lose if rationally he cannot be absolutely certain, as you are not absolutely certain, that there is no God? The most rational thing in the world is to cover all the possible bases that are in your own self interest. Certainly the salvation of one’s immortal soul is a base of self interest and therefore a rational choice.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

Gilbert Keith:

BOWSER

There are no atheists in foxholes."

This one simply is not true; and furthermore it is fairly easy to show it to be so. And the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers is rather good such evidence.

It is not easy to show that it is so. On the contrary, the most universal foxhole is the deathbed. Sooner or later, everybody is in that foxhole. I know of many atheists who have begun to pray at the hour of their death. You may say that this is not a rational response to facing death. But Pascal was a great mathematician and logician, and thought it was the most rational response possible.

After all, what has the atheist got to lose if rationally he cannot be absolutely certain, as you are not absolutely certain, that there is no God? The most rational thing in the world is to cover all the possible bases that are in your own self interest. Certainly the salvation of one’s immortal soul is a base of self interest and therefore a rational choice.

Pascal’s Wager is a bad argument. That aside, again, I want to try and keep questions about the existence of God out of the thread - if you want to make an EoG argument, open up a new thread dedicated to Pascal’s Wager.

As I said before, the things people do when under duress - when facing impending death - are not really the best guides to which beliefs are justified. Death is indeed a scary thing and people will do many things to try to avoid it. And the MAAF is fairly good evidence that there are atheists who remain atheist when facing impending death. Also, do you have some sort of evidence that a large number of atheists do convert on their deathbeds?

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

*Pascal’s Wager is a bad argument. *

Not to those on their deathbed, who are more concerned about their souls than they are about logic. As we have discussed in another thread, arrogant intellect recedes at this point, and is humbled somewhat. Instinct (desire) and imagination are given back their roles in our relationship with God.

Also, do you have some sort of evidence that a large number of atheists do convert on their deathbeds?

I don’t think people on their deathbeds who convert from atheism to Christianity have been the subject of polling. Do you have any evidence that a large number of atheists do not convert?

Two atheists in my family converted shortly before they died. That’s just my family. So I think the number of atheists that convert may well be substantial, though certainly not universal, and maybe not even a majority.

But I have never heard of a Christian converting to atheism on his deathbed. What would be the point so far as one’s self interest is concerned? Would instinct and imagination at this point be so arrogant as intellect seems to be in when dismissing the idea of God in times of robust health?

I’m sure there are atheists who hold out to the end. Do they find comfort in their atheism? I don’t see why they would … unless they have lived wicked lives and are comforted by not believing they will be held to account for their wickedness.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

*Pascal’s Wager is a bad argument. *

Not to those on their deathbed, who are more concerned about their souls than they are about logic. As we have discussed in another thread, arrogant intellect recedes at this point, and is humbled somewhat. Instinct (desire) and imagination are given back their roles in our relationship with God.

My particular concern is whether a belief in God is rationally justified. I don’t think that imagination and instinct are good guides to what is true in the world.

Also, do you have some sort of evidence that a large number of atheists do convert on their deathbeds?

I don’t think people on their deathbeds who convert from atheism to Christianity have been the subject of polling. Do you have any evidence that a large number of atheists do not convert?

My intent is to show that the idea that many atheists convert on their deathbeds is unfounded. Showing that most atheists don’t do so would be enough to do so, but is not necessary to do so; merely showing that there is no evidence that many atheists do so is enough to do so.

Two atheists in my family converted shortly before they died. That’s just my family. So I think the number of atheists that convert may well be substantial, though certainly not universal, and maybe not even a majority.

But I have never heard of a Christian converting to atheism on his deathbed. What would be the point so far as one’s self interest is concerned? Would instinct and imagination at this point be so arrogant as intellect seems to be in when dismissing the idea of God in times of robust health?

Basing beliefs about the world on what is in one’s self-interest is irrational. And if Christians are strong in their faith - good for them. Incidentally, however, one of the links in my OP discusses that some people do in fact have their belief in God shaken by death.

I’m sure there are atheists who hold out to the end. Do they find comfort in their atheism? I don’t see why they would … unless they have lived wicked lives and are comforted by not believing they will be held to account for their wickedness.

I don’t really think most atheists are atheists because they find comfort in it. I recall that for some time I thought it was depressing that God did not exist. But that has little to do with the merits of theism.

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

BOWSER

I don’t think that imagination and instinct are good guides to what is true in the world.

Einstein didn’t use imagination to discover relativity before he was able to prove it? The existence of the atom was not discovered by imagining it before its existence was proven?

My intent is to show that the idea that many atheists convert on their deathbeds is unfounded. Showing that most atheists don’t do so would be enough to do so, but is not necessary to do so; merely showing that there is no evidence that many atheists do so is enough to do so.

This is not logical. You don’t prove something to be so merely by pointing out that the opposite statement has not been proven.

Basing beliefs about the world on what is in one’s self-interest is irrational.

No, it isn’t. The founding fathers developed an American Republic based on the view that it was in their self interest to do so. I watch what I eat based on my desire not to become obese, which is in my self interest. Almost everything I do is in my self interest, unless I delude myself that tyranny and food are both lots of fun and good for me.

*I don’t really think most atheists are atheists because they find comfort in it. *

I don’t agree. I think most atheists want to be atheists, or they would not bother with atheism. There cannot be anything that forces them to be atheist. Logic alone can’t do that, though the atheist often appeals to logic as the basis of his atheism. This desire to be atheist has no rational basis for the simple reason that God cannot be proven not to exist. The basis for being an atheist must be rooted in some other cause … some aspect of the emotional life of the person which results in the desire to get rid of God.

On the deathbed or in the foxhole, the desire to get rid of God assumes considerably less importance and may well be overshadowed by the desire to believe in that which is in one’s self interest … hope for the immortality of one’s soul.

 

[Pug]

EnterTheBowser:

Ever heard of virtue ethics?

No, I hadn’t heard the term enough to retain the phrase. I looked it up, though. To claim that is enough for me to have encompased the thought behind it would be absurd. It claims to not be consequentialist, which I will accept at face value for now.

Traditional Christian thought and moral formation have focused on virtues, say the beatitudes, for example.

If you have a particular web reference that explains how concrete decisions are made in various standard *tight *situations, I would appreciate it.

 

[MrWhy]

Gilbert Keith:

It is not easy to show that it is so. On the contrary, the most universal foxhole is the deathbed. Sooner or later, everybody is in that foxhole. I know of many atheists who have begun to pray at the hour of their death. You may say that this is not a rational response to facing death. But Pascal was a great mathematician and logician, and thought it was the most rational response possible.

After all, what has the atheist got to lose if rationally he cannot be absolutely certain, as you are not absolutely certain, that there is no God? The most rational thing in the world is to cover all the possible bases that are in your own self interest. Certainly the salvation of one’s immortal soul is a base of self interest and therefore a rational choice.

The final hour of life is a scarry time for almost everyone, and not a time conducive to rational thought. Desperation and fear rule the mind. I don’t see how an individuals action at that point is evidence for or against anything.

Pascal’s Wager is an unethical “cover your rear” idea. One should be consistent and true to whatever you believe. It would seem to be a lie if someone in doubt acted otherwise just to make the best “bet”. It’s an integrity issue.

 

[StCsDavid]

EnterTheBowser:

I try not to speculate about the motives behind belief.

I agree with your assessment of psychoanalysis. It is more of an art than a science.

My faith calls me to question everything, and retain what is good. It’s not so much about speculation of motive as it is an honest assessment of good and evil. So it’s puzzleing to me when an individual sees good and completely rejects it. I’m not saying that athiests reject all good and are evil; however, their discernment of good and evil appears to be rooted in relative opinion. Ethics become situational. There would appear to be few if any absolute truths. Virtue shifts with ease depending on the need of the individual or collective group. I’ve lived that existence before and found it desperately insufficient in answering the big questions of existentialism.

Thanks be to God, I was given this gift of faith. That likely has a hollow ring for an athiest; however, it is my genuine lived experience. I can’t quantify it or begin to tell you how it happened, but I am ever so happy that it did. In it I have found the truth and peace.

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

MR.WHY

Pascal’s Wager is an unethical “cover your rear” idea. One should be consistent and true to whatever you believe. It would seem to be a lie if someone in doubt acted otherwise just to make the best “bet”. It’s an integrity issue."

Covering one’s rear" is not an action done without integrity. People do it all the time with a great deal of integrity. It may not be the noblest of motives, but neither is it a corupt motive. God offers us many way to salvation … and all of them are designed for us to act in our self interest … which is to find Him and be happy with Him. The deathbed conversion is not “selling out” one’s integrity. It is reneging on the lie whispered to us by the Devil … that God does not exist. The atheist who dies loyal to atheism is loyal to Nothing, because he can’t possibly believe that it is in his interest to be loyal to the so-called “truth” of Nothingness that lies ahead.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

Gilbert Keith:

BOWSER

I don’t think that imagination and instinct are good guides to what is true in the world.

Einstein didn’t use imagination to discover relativity before he was able to prove it? The existence of the atom was not discovered by imagining it before its existence was proven?

Imagination is wonderful for generating hypotheses. But we don’t accept them as true until tested by reason.

My intent is to show that the idea that many atheists convert on their deathbeds is unfounded. Showing that most atheists don’t do so would be enough to do so, but is not necessary to do so; merely showing that there is no evidence that many atheists do so is enough to do so.

This is not logical. You don’t prove something to be so merely by pointing out that the opposite statement has not been proven.

It is entirely logical. Someone comes up to you and tells you that most Guatemalans are Christian. You don’t need to go find a whole bunch of non-Christian Guatemalans to show that their statement is unfounded (although that would be sufficient for doing so). You just have to point out that they have no evidence to show that their claim is unfounded.

Basing beliefs about the world on what is in one’s self-interest is irrational.

No, it isn’t. The founding fathers developed an American Republic based on the view that it was in their self interest to do so. I watch what I eat based on my desire not to become obese, which is in my self interest. Almost everything I do is in my self interest, unless I delude myself that tyranny and food are both lots of fun and good for me.

Basing what you do on your own self-interest is practically the definition of (economic) rationality. But basing beliefs about what is true in the world on your own self-interest? That is irrational. The world is the way it is regardless of whether we like it or not.

*I don’t really think most atheists are atheists because they find comfort in it. *

I don’t agree. I think most atheists want to be atheists, or they would not bother with atheism. There cannot be anything that forces them to be atheist. Logic alone can’t do that, though the atheist often appeals to logic as the basis of his atheism. This desire to be atheist has no rational basis for the simple reason that God cannot be proven not to exist. The basis for being an atheist must be rooted in some other cause … some aspect of the emotional life of the person which results in the desire to get rid of God.

I will admit it: there are certain kinds of Gods that cannot be proven not to exist with mathematical certainty (ie they’re not logically impossible). But there are an infinite number of such hypotheses. That knock on my door - ir might be the friend I invited over, or it might be that space aliens abducted my friend, knocked on my door, erased my friend’s memory, and replaced the friend before I opened the door. There are good reasons to suspect that such a hypothesis is false. Furthermore, there are indeed doubts about whether a loving, powerful, and knowledgeable God is compatible with the suffering we see in the world.

On the deathbed or in the foxhole, the desire to get rid of God assumes considerably less importance and may well be overshadowed by the desire to believe in that which is in one’s self interest … hope for the immortality of one’s soul.

And as I’ve said previously - it might be really nice if I had a long-lost uncle who’s going to leave me millions of dollars… but that’s not good reason to believe that I actually have such an uncle.