Why do some people prefer to be atheists?

[Ontheway]

I think there hasn’t been agreement on what is being talked about when one speaks of “evil.” There are those that use “evil” as a label for intentional harm done by a moral agent and don’t include unintentional harm (whether done by a moral agent by accident or by nature). There are some that use the label to refer to anything that is harmful as evil, such as the huricane or earthquake or an attack on a person by an animal.

I am going to guess from your statement “there is no evil in nature” that you only refer to intentional harm performed by a moral agent.

To put it in other terms, (I just used the programmer argument because you are one) a gun is not evil it itself. We have the ability to judge its use in terms of good vs. evil.

 

[Bradski]

To put it in other terms, (I just used the programmer argument because you are one) a gun is not evil it itself. We have the ability to judge its use in terms of good vs. evil.

We, as you said earlier, being theists…?

 

[Pier]

Even though they are not convinced atheism is true?

Imo it seems mostly to be a matter of wanting to do things they shouldn’t be doing, and then not having to worry about going to hell for all eternity as a direct result of doing them.

 

[Ontheway]

So if I showed you an animal in a cage (the type of animal and size of the cage are not relevant), you would be able to say whether it was acceptable or not and I wouldn’t. It would be possible for you, as you are rational with a sense of right and wrong, but it would be impossible for me, not knowing the difference between right and wrong and being irrational.

Am I right in saying that?

If you do not believe in God, you have no tools to judge if something is good or evil. Those concepts come from religion. (of your choosing)
As an atheist, you reject God and the value system created by religion. How then do you develop the concept of good or evil? What criteria do you use? Science doesn’t deal with these issues. All other ideologies and all the -isms are in the end self-serving.
In today’s relativist society, you develop your own value system. Since I will develop my own, based largely on nothing (no God), then we are in constant conflict.

Example: I steal your cow. This is good. You steal my cow. This is evil.
Everything is relative.

 

[Pier]

Some believe atheism to be the intellectually superior position, and they want to see themselves as superior.

Omigoodness, yes…

They think we’re stoopid. Meanwhile, they’ll give you their opinion only after the NYTs tells them what it ought to be. Talk about indoctrinated…

 

[Bradski]

Imo it seems mostly to be a matter of wanting to do things they shouldn’t be doing, and then not having to worry about going to hell for all eternity as a direct result of doing them.

If you do things you shouldn’t be doing (c’mon, we all do) and you worry about going to hell, then I think I have the best end of the deal in that regard.

 

[Bradski]

If you do not believe in God, you have no tools to judge if something is good or evil. Those concepts come from religion. (of your choosing)
As an atheist, you reject God and the value system created by religion. How then do you develop the concept of good or evil? What criteria do you use? Science doesn’t deal with these issues. All other ideologies and all the -isms are in the end self-serving.
In today’s relativist society, you develop your own value system. Since I will develop my own, based largely on nothing (no God), then we are in constant conflict.

Example: I steal your cow. This is good. You steal my cow. This is evil.
Everything is relative.

I wasn’t looking for a treatise on what tools we employ in regard to defining morality. And it would seem a waste of time asking me what I use because you have already stated that I can’t do it. So could you go back to what I wrote and tell me if it’s correct or not.

If it isn’t then we can discuss what I got wrong.

 

[Ontheway]

I wasn’t looking for a treatise on what tools we employ in regard to defining morality. And it would seem a waste of time asking me what I use because you have already stated that I can’t do it. So could you go back to what I wrote and tell me if it’s correct or not.

If it isn’t then we can discuss what I got wrong.

A cow is neither moral nor immoral. (caged or not) And it has no capacity to judge,

 

[Jelrak_TB]

It is my observation that it is a struggle for people to live up to the truths they hold.

As it is embarrassing for me to admit that I find the television show The Big Bang Theory funny, I can easily imagine someone holding back when confronted in an academic or scientific setting with a situation where a statement regarding their belief in God would be in order. You keep silent long enough, the it-doesn’t-matter gradually takes over, and you lose the grace that provided you with an insight into the true nature of Reality. That may be how many atheists are formed. An initial temerity becomes a self-deception in order to deal with the incongruity between one’s actions and beliefs. Beliefs can be easily discarded in the face of hard choices.

Thank you for offering this insight.

My own ‘fall from grace’ was precipitated by an ardent desire to align my entire life in a Godwards direction…only I unfortunately attempted to carry the task to the extreme, having been inspired by a continuous rereading of Thomas A Kempis…the result was an austere life devoid of flavor…for I felt no joy in the undertaking.

In an effort to receive a greater insight into how best to correct the situation I opted to again read through the Bible…for some reason I was deeply troubled by what I found and so began taking notes to see if I could resolve some of the apparent issues…after over 100 pages of notes I took to find solutions to these problems, as my children were getting older and I felt a need to have answers in the event they might have similar questions…yet instead of solace I discovered greater difficulties…by page 420 I had realized with some surprise that I had become Agnostic in spite of continuing to pray for guidance. My repeated outreaches to a priest were ignored…so that eventually my final prayer to God ended with my typical sign-off, followed by a simple, “even though I do not believe you to exist.”

For this reason I have been unimpressed with arguments that might suggest a willful desire to disbelieve. There appears no reason great enough to potentially wish to imagine a finite end, with no possible future reunion with departed loved ones, and no apparent purpose in life beyond the passing on of one’s genetic code…I cannot imagine a thing with which I would not willingly part in order to obtain that essential peace of spirit and greater meaning…

Yet I am still hopeful…for I realize rationally that in having become atheist I have proven it possible to change one’s status of belief. If possible in one direction, why not another? Essentially given the number of years of my belief are yet superior to those of disbelief it does not yet appear reasonable to concede that I am entirely correct in this weighty matter…for if I was clearly wrong once, why could I not equally be wrong once again…?

My one frustration is that the years of being atheist seem to be gaining…

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Late in the game, but I have a question that I’d like to address to the atheists and non-believers. I am assuming that you are atheists because you have looked at some or all of the arguments for the existence of God put forth by believers and have refuted all of them.

Peter Kreeft, a philosopher and theologian lists 20 of those here.
peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm

How many of these have you considered and rejected?

All.

When I feared I was losing my faith I read as much of Peter Kreeft’s writing as I could access…yet I recall going through this list with a greater and greater sense of depression…yet even so he does remain one of my most favored authors on the topic…

 

[Jelrak_TB]

You have to ask them most atheists I’ve talked to don’t have a correct understanding of what or who God is. I love when they say it is the burden of the proof in the theist to prove God exists actually the opposite is true it is the burden of proof of the atheist to prove that God doesn’t exist since he is the one making the assertion

I both agree and disagree.

The burden of proof is upon the one attempting to initiate the conversion process. If one might have previously believed in God, I agree that the burden of proof is upon them to fairly absolve themselves from such a belief…yet for one raised atheist the burden of proof must needs be fairly upon the proselytizer for how else might one properly choose in which religion to believe…?

 

[Jelrak_TB]

I also think the problem of evil as an excuse to be at an atheist is a lame excuse for one without some kind of supernatural explanation there can’t even be such a thing as evil because everything would be based on the social Darwinism idea of evolution where is do what you will to get ahead which is certain groups thought. Without faith in some kind of supernatural to even claim that evil exists is superfluous

I feel perhaps a slight misunderstanding is at play…for what you say is entirely true, but only insofar as the atheist is not considering God in his line of sight.

Once God is introduced then the atheist does indeed have a fair argument to point out alleged contradictions between a formula for a being comprised entirely of love and an entire observable universe apparently created in large part as though love might merely have been the very slightest of utilitarian afterthoughts.

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Imo it seems mostly to be a matter of wanting to do things they shouldn’t be doing, and then not having to worry about going to hell for all eternity as a direct result of doing them.

It is possible…yet seemingly illogical. In my own situation I have nothing I would wish to be doing that I should not. I am not carrying on an affair…I have no appetite for pornography and would be in favor of its ban…I have no desire to see suffering applied to any one creed or segment of society…I am not taking wide and dishonest liberties of any sort even though such practices would be incredibly simple given my position…yet equally I have no belief that a Creator is behind any such efforts to resist…

Further, the very concept of Hell as a place I never expected to go, but to which I could never imagine wishing to send even my most reviled adversary was one element that began my doubts…

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Some believe atheism to be the intellectually superior position, and they want to see themselves as superior.

This is possible…it is quite reasonable to assume that one might seek to find solutions to problems that others seemingly leave on the table…yet is it entirely fair to consider the alternatives:

That theists do not believe theism to be intellectually superior and so, in wishing to be inferior, remain theists…?

Or…

*That theists believe theism to be the intellectually superior position and wish to see themselves as superior…?
*
Or…

*That individuals will tend to believe that which they find most convincing, and in so doing might or might not have a feeling of superiority in the discovery and support of their position…?
*

 

[Jelrak_TB]

If you do not believe in God, you have no tools to judge if something is good or evil. Those concepts come from religion. (of your choosing)
As an atheist, you reject God and the value system created by religion. How then do you develop the concept of good or evil? What criteria do you use? Science doesn’t deal with these issues. All other ideologies and all the -isms are in the end self-serving.
In today’s relativist society, you develop your own value system. Since I will develop my own, based largely on nothing (no God), then we are in constant conflict.

Example: I steal your cow. This is good. You steal my cow. This is evil.
Everything is relative.

I agree, and this is the basis for my difficulties with atheism…there is no firm frame of reference without a societal indoctrination…for reference one need look no further than a contrast between ISIS and Western ideology…yet informing both societies is still a background of belief in God and a willingness to live according to His dictates…even if both seem cavernously far apart…

 

[Bradski]

A cow is neither moral nor immoral. (caged or not) And it has no capacity to judge,

I really don’t beleive that you misunderstood what I said. I am not that obscure.

Cows? Ye gods.

I am talking about your professed ability to tell right from wrong and my inability to do the same. So if you can do it, you should be able to tell me, objectively, when it is wrong to keep something in a cage. That it is not a personal preference. That you can tell me that this animal in this cage is wrong.

I’ll be interested on what you base your decision. I’m not sure there’s anything in scripture or the catechism or the bible. Where do you get this inside info from, On?

 

[Jelrak_TB]

My current search for truth revolves around two chief potential outcomes I strongly wish to avoid:

1. I will rediscover a road to theism only after my children have reached the age of majority
2. My children will eventually subscribe to atheism, leaving their mother alone in her belief and myself as the one primarily responsible for their de-conversion

 

[Bradski]

My current search for truth revolves around two chief potential outcomes I strongly wish to avoid:

1. I will rediscover a road to theism only after my children have reached the age of majority
2. My children will eventually subscribe to atheism, leaving their mother alone in her belief and myself as the one primarily responsible for their de-conversion

Jel, you don’t have to convert or deconvert anyone. That’s not your job. Your job is to live your life as you see fit.

 

[Ontheway]

My current search for truth revolves around two chief potential outcomes I strongly wish to avoid:

1. I will rediscover a road to theism only after my children have reached the age of majority
2. My children will eventually subscribe to atheism, leaving their mother alone in her belief and myself as the one primarily responsible for their de-conversion

Hi Jelrak,

I don’t mean to be presumptuous, but here is a suggestion. Today is Sunday. Take your wife and kids and go to church. If they are believers, they will go willingly. You…will be making a sacrifice, for their sake.
Why make this sacrifice? Love.

 

[Thom18]

Peer pressure. These days being religious is seen as being “less intelligent”, and you get made fun of in school, at least, if you’re devout and don’t just stick to the “Christmas and Easter thing”. The media also tries to portray us as fanatics. The Catholic church especially is taking fire because of all the scandals. So, a lot of people either don’t associate with a religion at all, or tell everyone they’re atheist and keep their faith at home. This is the way I see it.