The Absurdity of Atheism

[clem456]

An atheist can believe just about anything. They can believe in aliens, Bigfoot, ghosts ect. They just don’t believe in god(s) because of lack of proof.

N-N-N-N-N-N-Nooo
Not so fast.
That might work down at Homer Simpson’s neighborhood bar but since we like to have a coherent discussion:

Atheists by definition say
“A” (no or against)
“the” (god)
“ist” (belief system)
What you describe above is not atheism it is
“meh, whatever”.

If you “just” (the ultimate statement of non-commitment) don’t believe in god(s) you wouldn’t be here, would you? You’d be out mowing the grass and soaking up that sunshine. But here you are!

I think you must have a statement you’d like to make.
In fact, most of the atheists here make very forceful statements of belief, and get very specific down to the minutely nuanced parsing agonizing detail, disputing definitions and going on about what this and that belief is.

I think you might have something to say about God. I don’t think you’re saying just any old thing. I think you take a forceful position here. I’m impressed with your commitment. I’d personally be more impressed if you claimed atheism honestly. Maybe I’d even believe with you. Commitment goes a long way.

 

[NM505StKate]

N-N-N-N-N-N-Nooo
Not so fast.
That might work down at Homer Simpson’s neighborhood bar but since we like to have a coherent discussion:

Atheists by definition say
“A” (no or against)
“the” (god)
“ist” (belief system)
What you describe above is not atheism it is
“meh, whatever”.

If you “just” (the ultimate statement of non-commitment) don’t believe in god(s) you wouldn’t be here, would you? You’d be out mowing the grass and soaking up that sunshine. But here you are!

I think you must have a statement you’d like to make.
In fact, most of the atheists here make very forceful statements of belief, and get very specific down to the minutely nuanced parsing agonizing detail, disputing definitions and going on about what this and that belief is.

I think you might have something to say about God. I don’t think you’re saying just any old thing. I think you take a forceful position here. I’m impressed with your commitment. I’d personally be more impressed if you claimed atheism honestly. Maybe I’d even believe with you. Commitment goes a long way.

dictionary.com/browse/atheist?r=2 here is the definition of atheist. One can be a deist or a polytheist. Wow you complicate things.

 

[owr39]

Yes because they have not seen enough proof of God existing. “Why don’t you believe?” “I have not seen enough proof.” Can you not prove to me there is a teapot in outer space?

So I ask you why don’t believe in God, and your answer would be “I have not seen enough proof.” That would be the foundation for your belief?

I believe the notion that everyone and everything that exists in this world was by accident is silly. Is that not essentially what atheism is? Why should I subscribe to that belief?

 

[clem456]

Yes because they have not seen enough proof of God existing. “Why don’t you believe?” “I have not seen enough proof.” Can you not prove to me there is a teapot in outer space?

No.
Can you prove to me you are not a bot?
Can you prove to me the moon is coming back because heck, I can’t see it!!!

Where were you before you were?
Take your time:coffeeread:.

 

[NM505StKate]

So I ask you why don’t believe in God, and your answer would be “I have not seen enough proof.” That would be the foundation for your belief?

I believe the notion that everyone and everything that exists in this world was by accident is silly. Is that not essentially what atheism is? Why should I subscribe to that belief?

Correct that I have not seen enough proof. I don’t get how you come to

everything that exists in this world was by accident

. Also dictionary.com/browse/atheist?r=2 is what atheism is. Lack of belief in god(s). Being skeptical.

 

[NM505StKate]

No.
Can you prove to me you are not a bot?
Can you prove to me the moon is coming back because heck, I can’t see it!!!

Where were you before you were?
Take your time:coffeeread:.

I am not a bot because I can pass a captcha and am replying to you.

The moon is coming back, it never really leaves so, because we have deduced it’s cycle as well as when the earth faces away from the sun and the moon can be seen more clearly.

I don’t really understand your last question. Before I was born I was not in existence. Maybe I am space dust.

 

[clem456]

I am not a bot because I can pass a captcha and am replying to you.

The moon is coming back, it never really leaves so, because we have deduced it’s cycle as well as when the earth faces away from the sun and the moon can be seen more clearly.

I don’t really understand your last question. Before I was born I was not in existence. Maybe I am space dust.

Prove it.
All of it.
Demonstrate it to us with indisputable physical evidence.

 

[NM505StKate]

Prove it.
All of it.
Demonstrate it to us with indisputable physical evidence.

Well unless I take a picture of myself and post it here that is proof of the first. We have data that you can look up for the second. For the third I can show you pictures of the world before I was born and by taking a sample of blood as well as other physical samples I can show how my body is made up what stars are made of.

 

[owr39]

Correct that I have not seen enough proof. I don’t get how you come to . Also dictionary.com/browse/atheist?r=2 is what atheism is. Lack of belief in god(s). Being skeptical.

By believing in God, by default I believe the universe has a creator.

By being an Atheist, by default the belief there is no creator. Then what created us? How did we come to be?

If that’s not something you can answer, I would say you’re agnostic.

 

[NM505StKate]

By believing in God, by default I believe the universe has a creator.

By being an Atheist, by default the belief there is no creator. Then what created us? How did we come to be?

If that’s not something you can answer, I would say you’re agnostic.

Correct there is no creator. We came about through a biological process that is banned on these boards. We were not created at all. How life started, abiogenesis, is unknown at this time. So I can say I do not know how life started and that is awesome!

 

[tonyrey]

tonyrey: If you told an atheist “God exists” and they say “Prove it” you have to prove it. You are shifting the goal posts with your first statement. On your second point you sure are a negative Nancy, cheer up! I don’t know how that begs a question. I get the feeling you are a prepper. Sitting in a bunker listening to Alex Jones waiting for a cataclysm to hit. Need a tin foil hat?

If anyone is shifting the goal posts it is the person who changes the subject from the Absurdity of Atheism to the Cogency of Theism! In politics it is called throwing a dead cat on the table…

People who do nothing to try to avert a nuclear holocaust need to see a psychiatrist. :whacky: Living in a fool’s paradise with everything at stake is a sign of lunacy reminiscent of Nero fiddling while Rome burns blissfully unaware of the harsh reality of evil - which of course is merely a human convention in a Godless universe - but what more can be expected of people who believe only in what they hear, see, smell, taste and touch? If only matter exists nothing matters…

 

[tonyrey]

Correct there is no creator. We came about through a biological process that is banned on these boards. We were not created at all. How life started, abiogenesis, is unknown at this time. So I can say I do not know how life started and that is awesome!

An appeal to ignorance is hardly an “awesome” explanation… It amounts to a flight from reason, seeking refuge in obscurity as if it doesn’t matter how or why anyone or anything exists - including ourselves of course - and is yet further evidence of the absurdity of atheism which is a gratuitous dogma based on the unsubstantiated assumption that reality is irrationaleven though it doesn’t correspond to the way every reasonable person thinks and behaves in daily life…

 

[ThinkingSapien]

By believing in God, by default I believe the universe has a creator.

There are also those in religions that believe that the universe created the Supreme one. Different religions can have different perspectives on the relationship between God and the universe.

Atheists by definition say
“A” (no or against)

I understand it generally to be “without.”
A-pathy: without feeling.
A-sexual: without sex
A-phonia: without voice

The a- prefix doesn’t necessarily denote that one thing is against another. You’ll find that apathy and antipathy are not quite the same disposition. Some use the term “antitheist” to speak of a person whose disposition is against theistic religions.

What you describe above is not atheism it is
“meh, whatever”.

Someone with a “whatever” disposition could be Apatheistic (considered a subset of agnostic atheist).

I’d personally be more impressed if you claimed atheism honestly. Maybe I’d even believe with you. Commitment goes a long way.

I’ve seen stated here “once Catholic always Catholic.” If a person were Catholic but became an atheist do you think it reasonable for the person to still claim Catholic as part of their identity?

 

[tonyrey]

Correct there is no creator. We came about through a biological process that is banned on these boards. We were not created at all. How life started, abiogenesis, is unknown at this time. So I can say I do not know how life started and that is awesome!

Note the irrational dogmatism: “there** is no** creator”, “We came about through a biological process” and " We were not created at all" based on “unknown”! :ehh:

NB “awesome” implies that life is extremely valuable even though it is supposedly derived from valueless molecules. As the sceptic David Hume would say “The effect is not proportioned to the cause”… GIGO

 

[Charlemagne_III]

ccmnxc: But you are not broken or fallen.

Charlemagne III: I don’t go to confession anymore. To be fair I also don’t eat the Eucharist anymore either. I was baptized Catholic as a baby and went to Catholic school from K-12.

Aloysium:

Prove that God exists.

Why do you identify yourself as a Catholic when you have repudiated two of the most vital sacraments of the Catholic Church and dare others to prove that God exists?

 

[Solmyr]

An appeal to ignorance is hardly an “awesome” explanation…

Admitting the lack of knowledge (e.g. about the origin of abiogenesis) is NOT an appeal to ignorance. On the other hand to argue that SINCE we don’t have an explanation to its origin and therefore we presume that it MUST have been “created” by the Flying Spaghetti Monster (aka God) IS an argument from ignorance. Just a friendly help to make sure that next time you will not make such an elementary mistake.

It amounts to a flight from reason…

Quite to the contrary… it invokes and encourages further investigation instead of dogmatically asserting that an “unknowable being, using unimaginable ways made it somehow happen”. That IS an appeal to ignorance.

 

[Bradski]

So I ask you why don’t believe in God, and your answer would be “I have not seen enough proof.” That would be the foundation for your belief?

It certainly would. What is acceptable as evidence will be different as far as you are concerned but as far as anyone who self describes as an atheist, the evidence is simply not strong enough to prompt a belief. Note that that does not mean that there is no evidence – just that it isn’t convincing enough.

I believe the notion that everyone and everything that exists in this world was by accident is silly. Is that not essentially what atheism is? Why should I subscribe to that belief?

The processes that resulted in us being here were (and are) entirely natural. You believe that the processes were supernatural. That’s all good. No-one is looking to change your mind. And there is no reason for you to subscribe to anyone else’s belief system. If you think something is silly, then no-one expects you to believe it. Each to his or her own.

 

[owr39]

It certainly would. What is acceptable as evidence will be different as far as you are concerned but as far as anyone who self describes as an atheist, the evidence is simply not strong enough to prompt a belief. Note that that does not mean that there is no evidence – just that it isn’t convincing enough.

The processes that resulted in us being here were (and are) entirely natural. You believe that the processes were supernatural. That’s all good. No-one is looking to change your mind. And there is no reason for you to subscribe to anyone else’s belief system. If you think something is silly, then no-one expects you to believe it. Each to his or her own.

I agree with that. My statements were made in regards to the argument that the burden of proof always falls on the shoulders of the believer.

 

[Bradski]

I agree with that. My statements were made in regards to the argument that the burden of proof always falls on the shoulders of the believer.

Indeed it do.

If you tell me that you believe that we have been visited by aliens, then I will probably ask you why you believe that. There must be some evidence otherwise you wouldn’t hold the belief. If I don’t think that the evidence is convincing, I won’t believe it myself.

But it would then be fairly ridiculous for you to demand from me in response for evidence that we haven’t been visited by aliens. I wouldn’t have evidence that we haven’t been visited (exceptionally difficult to furnish) - it’s simply that you haven’t offered acceptable evidence for it having happened.

However, having said that, if I were to stand on a street corner with a placard saying: ‘God does not Exist’, then you would be quite within your rights to ask me for proof.

It might be a good idea, when conversing with atheists, if you ask them at the outset if they would be prepared to take over holding the placard for a while.

I don’t know any atheist, certainly all the one’s I know on this forum, who would be prepared to do so.

 

[owr39]

Indeed it do.

If you tell me that you believe that we have been visited by aliens, then I will probably ask you why you believe that. There must be some evidence otherwise you wouldn’t hold the belief. If I don’t think that the evidence is convincing, I won’t believe it myself.

But it would then be fairly ridiculous for you to demand from me in response for evidence that we haven’t been visited by aliens. I wouldn’t have evidence that we haven’t been visited (exceptionally difficult to furnish) - it’s simply that you haven’t offered acceptable evidence for it having happened.

However, having said that, if I were to stand on a street corner with a placard saying: ‘God does not Exist’, then you would be quite within your rights to ask me for proof.

It might be a good idea, when conversing with atheists, if you ask them at the outset if they would be prepared to take over holding the placard for a while.

I don’t know any atheist, certainly all the one’s I know on this forum, who would be prepared to do so.

If you tell me “God doesn’t exist! We weren’t created, we always just…were!” You absolutely have the burden of proof to show me why that’s so. A lack of belief is still a belief. You can use alien examples all you want, but the person making the claim has the burden of proof.