why bother to defend a disbelief in another’s delusions?
I’ve observed this question being asked many times over the years; and very often, it is asked with a tinge of scepticism, almost as if the query assumes a certain psychological insight into the atheistic mind. I’d like to pose a certain answer to it that I have rarely seen given, because I consider it an important key to understanding this, and it’s very, very simple.
To begin, let’s bear in mind that in life, there are duties and obligations that we must all adhere to and meet if we wish to have comfort, both financial as well as emotional. For example, many people spend a great deal of years submitting themselves to the curricula of universities, so that they may prepare for a career in some lucrative field of knowledge. I myself, had spent my youth, pushed from behind by my parents, preparing for university; and in university, I spent six years pursuing a Doctor of Pharmacy degree. What motivated me? Primarily, the overwhelming feeling that I have a duty and obligation to fulfill if I wish to live a certain lifestyle.
But even though I have had pharmacology intertwined with my personality, and even though I adore the subject and my profession, I nonetheless find myself needing to engage my mind in subjects and topics for which there is no true benefit aside from personal pleasure. I have become, then, a novice pianist over time; as well as a dabbler in classical drawing, and an amateur historian focusing primarily on the Middle Ages. I began, with my wife, a guild for artists who love and work within traditional forums of expression; those who wish to copy the art of Michelangelo, say, or playwrights inspired by the Bard of Avon. Our little group has something like three dozen persons, none of whom receive even a penny for their art, and all of whom are engaged in careers which have nothing at all to do with it.
Why do I mention these things? Simply to point out something which I hope you don’t find to be too silly; and that is that there are a great deal of people who, in their private lives, away from their careers, require of themselves a level of activity in their interests. They wish to be learning constantly, for that is all that they have known their whole lives, and they wish to improve on and explore their talents and personalities. For some, it may take the form of doing something which is different from their work, using entirely different forms of thinking, so that they may be more ‘rounded’ in their self-actualisation. For others, it may take the form of them engaging in activities which are an extension of their work, and the forms of thinking they know best.
This last group of people, I think, describes a great deal of atheists. Consider three major types of atheist:
(i) The apathetic sort who simply do not believe in the supernatural, as you have said it, who carry on in their normal lives rarely thinking of the matter;
(ii) The theoretical sort who approaches the matter from an intellectual perspective and attempts to constantly understand the matter better;
(iii) The passionate sort who actively attempts to change the society around himself to adhere more precisely with his assumptions.
The second group, the theoretical, is the type I am referring to here. They can be people from all walks of life, but a lot of them happen to be scientists and philosophers. For such people, in their private lives, they may choose to study topics which are an extension of the fact and data-driven logic they have come to accept as the most useful form of thinking. They may do things such as solving complex puzzles, or else, they may choose to become experts in certain complicated questions or debates, such a theism vs. atheism.
I am arguing, therefore, that this type of atheist is as active in these sorts of discussions as they are, because of the following:
(i) The topic requires of them that their natural talent is used, and they derive pleasure from using it;
(ii) They very often will find that their education is able to be used away from their career, and in terms of personal interests or conversation, this colours their decisions of what to pursue or not pursue;
(iii) They are interested in the fact that this debate intersects so many different forms of learning which they are not experts in, such as linguistics or history, and this becomes a catalyst to their further, personal education;
(iv) For these, and other reasons, they simply find the phenomenon of theism to be fascinating, and enjoy what they are able to acquire from studying it.
Of course, this answer is very, very basic, and only describes things in a general manner. Many people may wade out of the waters of religion, simply because of emotional pain or various other reasons; many atheists may be bitter, unhappy people who seek to constantly reduce the joy of others. But in general, I think my observation stands in most cases.
Lastly, simply because one is an atheist and does not discuss the matter, this should not be viewed as being less or more noble than those atheists who do. Let us remember that not everyone has the discipline, desire, or resources to become an expert or near-expert on anything at all.
