Atheism, as an alternative belief, is based on what?

Question

If based on the absence of proof, what then would suffice as proof? Absence of proof does not mean absence of existence.

Answer 1

As you read through the answers, notice the temperment, mentality and basic rudeness of some of the answers.
Which side is having a discussion and which side are just being unnecessarily rude and immature?
Speaks volumes.

Answer 2

Short answer: Atheism is based on no evidence of god(s)

Atheists do not believe there is no god, we know there are no god(s) to believe in.

atheists have never been offered any evidence to the existence of a god, which includes the thousands of gods that have been created throughout history, therefore there are no god(s)

The only evidence of higher powers is other peoples beliefs and books written about beliefs by believers. The christian bible,for example was written 2000 years ago by the equivalent of cavemen by todays standards of knowledge, and yet people believe that these ancestors knew the origin of the universe.

What would constitute proof?

If one day the earth opens up and swallows all the non christians, and as I go down into the earth, if I look up and see you ascending into heaven into the arms of god, I'll yell out.
"You were right", then I'll burn in eternal hellfire.

Until then you're just pretending.

If you can prove the supernatural in a scientific setting you can win one million dollars. So far nobody has been able to do it.
Give it a try, it's a real offer, with a real prize.
If somebody ever wins this prize it will make worldwide news and prove to millions of atheists that the supernatural exists.

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

This is a list of some people who have failed so far

http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=43

Answer 3

So, do you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Invisible Pink Unicorn? And what about the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause? Absence of proof does not mean absence of existence. This may be true, but it is logical to claim something does not exist when there is no evidence for it.

Answer 4

Atheism is not an alternative belief in my opinion. I agree with you when you say "absence of proof does not mean absence of existence." Atheism is a man-made term that is null and void.
Atheism is not a belief system there there no such thing as atheism. Unbelievers or anti-Christians are sufficient terms for these types of people.

+T+

Answer 5

Not based on the absence of proof. Based on the belief that god doesn't, and never has, existed. The concept of god is a man made one. And christianity is based on what? The absence of proof against god existance. Your arguement can be turned around the same way. Oh but you say that god is proven by the bible. But the concept of the christian god is created from the bible so you are going to use the bible to prove itself? Doesn't work that way

Answer 6

Atheism is a default position.

You say a lack of proof does not mean absence of existence, but, what is a belief based on a lack of evidence called??? Ignorance?

I'd rather be an atheist than ignorant.

Answer 7

Alternative belief ?
Alternative to believing in a all-powerful, invisible, loving, lonely, sadist, angry, non-existent god. I'd hardly call not believing in something an "alternative belief".

Would you want proof of leprechauns? If people knocked on your door at 8am on Saturday, till you answered. Just to preach about leprechauns and then act like your rude, for wanting to go back to bed.
Well, then you would know how I feel.

No offense, but if god weren't invisible, I think he wouldn't have this non-believers problem. Tell your god to appear.
A god I can see, that's the only proof I need. <--- he'd also have to prove that he was not simply a person, pretending to be god. Parting the water in the pool, will suffice.

Answer 8

The explanation of your question needs to be explained. The thing is that Athiesm isn't based on an absence of proof, but on knowledge. Every religion man has invented is so full of holes that swiss cheese gets jealous! I am an Agnostic who leans towards Athiesm, but I do read quite a bit about different religions from an anthropological standpoint. To understan human history you have to read about everything in culture. From their art to their religion, politics and social peculiararities. I find it especially funny how little modern man knows about their most cherished beliefs. In a society where we supposedly know more than ever before how people will cling to religions like bees to honey. Anybody who does historical and anthropoligical research into any "modern" religion will find that they are based entirely on smoke and mirrors. The anti-athiest people here especially like to throw stones, but the intellegent athiest/agnostic knows that they are the ones living in glass houses.

Answer 9

Ill take any miracle performed by Jesus in the NT as proof - if you can replicate it today in a laboratory environment, and get the same results time after time of conducting the same experiment. That would suffice as proof. So - raise one actual DEAD person, Ill be a believer. But - they have to be dead and buried for three days....not some magic trick or inducing a coma, but actual death. Or, lets see someone walk on water. Ill take that as proof. Or, simply, since God answers all prayers, Id like you to cure alll cancern on the face of the earth - after all, this would be asking for God to do something for all others except yourself, so God should answer, right? THEN WHY DOESNT HE?

Because, simply put - God doesnt exist.

www.godisimaginary.com

Answer 10

Absence of proof does not mean absence of existence..........those being your own words you could easily turn this question around and ask the same thing of those that do believe in god

Answer 11

Atheism is the default rational modern human belief.

Religious belief requires faith, usually instilled by childhood upbringing, a kind of mild brainwashing based on peer pressure.

Sometimes faith is found later in life. The emotional affect can be profound.

But regardless of the time of acquisition of faith, it comes only AFTER a period of disbelief.

Faith has an emotional implication that can not be removed from subjective observation. Reason implies observation without emotional bias. Assuming rational adherence to logic and scientific method, the onus is on the faithful to provide proof, not the Atheist.