Freewill and the existence of God?

Question

In a Rush song of the same title, lyricist Neal Peart states, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice".

Many of you have posted that there is no God.

Many of you have suffered a trauma, and have stopped believing in God.

Using humanistic logic and deductive reasoning, then, would you agree or disagree with the following statement:

I have chosen not believe in God. Since I have made this choice, there may be a God, I just choose not to believe in him. Since I choose not to believe in God, there still must be one, but I do not believe.

This is a philosophical debate, so I would appreciate intelligent, rational arguements, please.

Answer 1

How to Understand the Difference Between Theism and Atheism
Throughout human history, there have been people who believed, and people who didn't. Problems occur when one side misunderstands the other. This article will help you avoid those problems.

Steps
Understand what theist and a-theist mean. A theist believes in a god or gods; an atheist does not have such a belief. This does not mean that a theist defends a deity or deities, or an atheist attacks dieties. Atheists simply lack a belief a theist has.
Recognize that most theists believe in a particular god or gods, but not all gods. The choice of gods for a particular theist is usually determined by where he was born, and the example of his parents, not conscious choice. There are (relatively) few Buddhists in the United States; likewise there are few Christians in Japan.
Keep in mind that an atheist does not hate the theist’s god, or any god; he simply lacks a belief in such a god. He may think a theist foolish for believing in such things, or be frustrated with theists who do destructive things in the name of their gods, but he doesn’t hate a religious icon anymore than a theist hates the Tooth Fairy.
Likewise keep in mind that a theist usually has a way of understanding life in which ethical and spiritual beliefs are inseparable, so to question one is to question the other; this never leads to a constructive end.
Notice that if you remove the supernatural elements of most religions, the ethical core is agreeable to most people, theist and atheist alike; e.g. the golden rule of Jesus: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, or as Rabbi Hillel put it, “Don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want done to you. Most intelligent people agree with that. Recognizing this common ground provides a buffer for the emotional issues surrounding belief vs. disbelief.

Tips
To come to a broader understanding of human beliefs and understanding of life through folklore and religion, read Joseph Campbell’s works, including Hero with a Thousand Faces, and his series on Primitive, Creative, Occidental, and Oriental Mythologies. Whether theist or atheist, these works will help you recognize the common human experience, and the similar ways mankind has developed for understanding it across ages and cultures.
Some people promote the idea that atheism is a religion. The best comparison I've heard is this: "Atheism is a religion like baldness is a hairstyle."

Warnings
Anytime you come to a balanced view on such issues, there will be people who try to put you back on an imbalanced path, e.g. "But what about all the horrible things (theists/atheists) have done?!" Just counter with the fact that throughout history people have done wonderful and horrible things regardless of belief or ethnicity, so there seems to be no correlation.
Likewise remember that just because someone in a certain religious group did something awful does not mean it's the religion's fault. People are responsible for their actions (and inaction), and many are inspired by their faith into amazing acts of self-sacrifice and love.

SEE ALSO:

How to Understand Philosophical Determinism
Do we have free will, or are our actions determined? This is one of the classic questions in philosophy. Deep thinkers have been arguing both sides of this issue for thousands of years. Most people are already familiar with the doctrine of free will. It states that we always have the power to choose our actions, regardless of the circumstances. This view is popular in Western cultures, although it does imply that we as individuals are always in control. However, there is an opposite view - one held by many prominent thinkers. Philosphical determinism holds that we are neither in control, nor capable of true free will. This article is a brief "layman's" introduction to philosophical determinism, and how it differs from the more common belief in free will.

Steps
Understand what determinism really is. Very simply, determinism is the belief that all events have causes, and that if there are identical causes, the same effects must occur. This is very easy to see in the natural world, and all of science is based on it. However, it can be difficult to recognize how this applies to human behavior (which most people consider to be separate from the natural world).
Determinists may say that a belief in free will implies the acknowledgment of the supernatural. Logic dictates that if the human being is part of the natural world, human behavior must be deterministic. In order to escape determinism, a supernatural element is required. In Western culture, this generally takes the form of a "soul," "spirit," or "higher self." For the believer in free will, this "magical person" (as determinists may call it) is able to make conscious decisions and choices which take precedence over the natural causes which govern the rest of the universe. Of course, creating a higher entity or soul, is itself beautifully deterministic.
Understand how belief in determinism comes about. Generally, when one accepts naturalism (which is the idea that everything [including the individual human being] is part of a single unified natural world), determinism is a logical consequence. Most determinists reject free will because they have first rejected the supernatural. For the supernaturalist, free will remains a logical idea, but for the naturalist, it is not. Of course, without free will (or "free thought" if you will) there would be no determinism, so determinism can also be seen as a revolutionary ideal, a rebellion against the existing supernatural order, advocating a return to "natural" laws of existence.
Realize what determinism means in the "real world." Many philosophers think that if people are naturally caused to behave the way they do (instead of "magically choosing" to do so), we should consider the idea that many punitive (punishment-based) actions may be irrational. For the determinist, punishing people (psychologically, economically or judicially) for actions or circumstances which are entirely caused is logically inconsistent. Accordingly, there is a reduced emphasis on blame and punishment, and an increased desire to discover the hidden causes of human behavior.
Finally, you can decide whether you believe in determinism or free will. If you believe that people have souls or spirits which survive death, determinism probably isn't for you. Similarly, if you believe in any form of the supernatural (anything outside or above the natural world), you will probably have a hard time accepting determinism. Remember, if you choose determinism, you must believe that it is because you were caused to do so (either by this article or a variety of other possible determinants). If you choose free will, you must believe that it is entirely your choice, and you could have chosen otherwise.

Tips
A common objection to determinism is that it provides "an excuse for everything," but most philosophers feel that this is a misunderstanding. The fact that an action is determined rather than than freely chosen does not change the nature of the action. Determinism is not a "get out of trouble free card." Actions have consequences, whether we believe in free will, determinism, or nothing at all.
If you want to fry your brain a bit, keep in mind that even if you believe in free will, there has to be a reason (a cause) for you to do so. If you believe in free will because you believe that people have souls, you still arrived at your belief because of something, and that's evidence for determinism!
If you're a die-hard free will believer, but you'd like a practical example of what determinism is all about, try to go an entire day without using the word "because." After all, if you're talking about causes, you're talking about determinism. If your belief in free will can survive an entire day without referring to causes of any kind, your faith is strong enough to withstand any logical argument.

Warnings
Most determinists are also atheists (or agnostics), naturalists, and freethinkers. If these viewpoints appeal to you, determinism may be something you would like to know more about. If they bother (or offend) you, you may not want to argue about this issue with a determinist. Discussing free will and determinism will require an examination of many deeply-held beliefs, which may not always be a pleasant experience.

Answer 2

I have chosen not to believe in god because there is no proof, not because there 'may' be a God. With proof, i would absolutely believe in god. The only proof that people bring up is the existence of complex life forms, butterflies, or 'beautiful sunsets."

In the movie “The Gods Must Be Crazy,” a native in the Kalahari Desert encounters technology for the first time--in the shape of a Coke bottle. I found this to be very amusing, but I also began to see parallels between his thought process, and that of the modern day Theist. Both are using CAVEMAN LOGIC to explain their world. I fail to see the difference between “hmm, bottle fall from sky, must be gods” and “hmm, trees and butterflies prove the existence of god.”

In both of these cases, someone is simply replacing one unknown for another unknown, but proving nothing!

Not only can God not be proven, but I will also go so far as to say that God can be disproved. It is impossible for something to be all knowing and all good. If you are aware that something bad is going to happen, and you allow it to happen anyway, then you cannot be all good. If God created everything, then he also created evil. It is also impossible to be all-powerful; can God create a rock that even he himself cannot move?

Answer 3

I think the logic of the question is flawed and circular. I am an atheist because of logic and deductive reasoning. Choice was not involved.
Since there is no possible definitive proof that there is a god it would seem that people of faith are the ones who choose to place belief above logic and deductive reasoning. The faithful, then, have at least two choices...believe or not. Atheists technically don't have a choice. The default position is that there is no god, therefore no choice is to be made. It is impossible to have faith in something one doesn't believe.
In the absence of proof, it falls on the shoulders of the faithful to tangibly prove there is a god.

Answer 4

No, that argument is not logical. It is not sound. What you are describing is ignoring God. And that is a big difference. What you are describing is acknowledging God's existence and ignoring that. The problem in your argument lies in the second clause, "Since I have made this choice (to not believe in God), there may be a God, I just choose not to believe in Him". What you are describing is ignoring something, choosing to believe when there may be evidence of the contrary. Most atheists, and I am speaking for myself - so I may be wrong about this, do not believe in God because of a lack of evidence. Just like you don't believe there is a Santa Claus or Leprechauns. If, by your argument you substituted the word God for Unicorns, would that make you a believer of Unicorns? I don't think so. Hope this helps.

Answer 5

If your logic is correct then from philosophical perspective it must work for any noun[1]. The easier way to demonstrates the flaw in your logic is to change the word "God" to "Space Pirates"
Your argument becomes:

I have chosen not believe in Space Pirates. Since I have made this choice, there may be Space Pirates, I just choose not to believe in them. Since I choose not to believe in Space Pirates, there still must be some Space Pirates, but I do not believe.

As a proof of existence of space pirates, this is pretty weak, Mostly because the jump from "may be" to "must" is unwarranted.

Answer 6

I think the statement is flawed! The proposition "Since i choose not to believe in God" cannot be an inference to "there still must be one". This is a logical fallacy, fallacy of assumption i think (been a few years since logic class).
So the integral logic of the statement undermines it.
So i cannot agree that choosing not to believe in something must make it true.
Choosing not to eat cake makes the cake real in the face of the actual choice we make but choosing not to believe in cake does not follow through that cake exists, in fact it follows through that it may not exist. The same is true of this.

Answer 7

You make some good points.. I am a Christian and I love the Lord dearly and treasure His Word... anyway, any intelligent person who says they do not believe in God would have to admit that they CHOOSE not to believe, not they KNOW he does not exist. To say someone (GOD) does not exist you have made an absolute statement and thus would have to be totally omnicient to have stated that. What they should admit is I do not see any evidence or I do not believe, as opposed to I know He does not exist.

Answer 8

You just cannot equate the two statements on the same context. Freewill by itself cannot disprove, undo nor render improbable the existence of GOD or anything under the sun...the moon..and the stars.

Freewill may well be the ultimate blunder made by GOD, which HE so chose to make using HIS ultimate freewill. But then again I say this using my freewill which had no bearing on the ultimate TRUTH...whatever that may be.

Answer 9

If God were to be the name of ALL -THAT -IS you would not need to "believe" it.
"All that is " rules and is always there. We do what we do because we are part of That.
Have you ever worked it out ? If you try you could discover that when you do a thing freely you may find out that we are doing this particular thing because we are programmed by genes and conditioning.
We indulge in believing because we want to play games.

Answer 10

If you stay in touch with the latest study about science, maybe you will take back your statement. Many of wellknown scientist as Depak Chopra believe that science is related to spiritual activity. and they would revealed it soon.
I belive in God, no mater He is Material or not, or maybe something higher intelectual then human, but if He create me,..I must respect Him. That the Intelectual people must said, dont you respect your parent ?

Answer 11

to agree or disagree?, to believe or not to believe?, its either you do or you don't...there is no maybe God exist, maybe not. either way, as the holy Ppl say, God believes in you even if you don't believe in God.

Why acknowledge when you don't believe? that statement is sheer hypocrisy of people who are influenced or incline to believe the more believable. i.e: shamans, witch doctors, astrologers etc. God is not physical, these ppl are. Its easy to believe in them than god as they always have answers for you on the spot. Think abt it.........