Hardcore Atheists: are you aware of how similar your arguments are to hardcore theists?

Question

You both sound like fanatics, ignoring the logic that argues for uncertainty, or at least deference to the possibility of being wrong. You both resort to "I believe because I believe" circular logic.

Given all the grief atheists give theists for the faith of theists, I am amazed you'd resort to the same reasoning and be blind to it.

And to clarify:
1. I am not a christian
2. I'm not an atheist.
3. I'm not an agnostic (I have my own convincing spiritual experience)
4. Atheism is as faith-based as Theism, due to the lack of convincing evidence to support the premise of Atheism.
Comments?

Answer 1

I like to think that I have some quite valid and compelling reasons for believing that gods are imaginary, rather than just saying "I believe because I believe":

=== 1: Simple Common Sense ===

Nothing in life has ever made me suspect that any gods really exist. I see no divine revelations, no miracles, no answered prayers, no preferential good fortune for people of any particular faith, no divine retribution for evildoers, no protection for the virtuous, the innocent or the weak. Life is exactly as we would expect it to be if there was no divine influence in the world - i.e. good and bad things come to good and bad people alike. Our lives are subject to chance, and the actions of other people, but that seems to be all.

=== 2: The Natural World ===

"Nature does all things spontaneously, by herself, without the meddling of the gods." - Titus Lucretius Carus (c.99-55 BCE).

We can see no sign of any divine involvement in the natural world. Galaxies, stars and planets form because it is in the nature of matter to do so. Living organisms evolve and diverge by the unthinking, undirected process of evolution. There is no plan, no design, just the effects of probability and the properties of matter and forces. Many people will claim to the contrary, but as far as I can tell this just reflects an ignorance about how the natural world really is, rather than the perception of any higher truth. Certainly, their arguments always evaporate in the light of reason.

=== 3: Logical Arguments ===

First, I cannot believe that the wealth of organisation, complexity and diversity that we see in the physical world, and particularly in the structures and functions of living organisms, could just exist fully formed with no origin, no precursor, nothing to explain its existence. By the same token, therefore, I cannot believe that an entity could exist which designed and created the physical and natural world, and which *itself* exists fully formed with no origin, no precursor, no explanation for its existence. The only reasonable explanation, therefore, is that organisation, complexity and diversity are features which naturally develop out of simplicity and chaos because of the fundamental nature of the universe. This is indeed what science shows us, in the form of cosmology and biology, as supported by real objective evidence and reasoned argument.

Second, we've known for thousands of years that the 'tri-omni' gods of classical monotheistic religions cannot exist. If an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity existed, then human evil could not exist. Since human evil unarguably does exist, the classical monotheistic deity cannot exist (objections about 'free will' notwithstanding).

Third, Quantum Mechanics strongly suggests that nothingness is a state that cannot exist in reality, since that would be 100% deterministic, and QM says that existence is probabilistic rather than deterministic. Experimental evidence supports QM. If true, then this also precludes the existence of a creator, since it would be impossible to have a state of 'nothingness' from which a 'something' could be created.

Fourth, all attempts at arguing *for* the existence of any gods through logic and reason can be and have been comprehensively debunked.

=== 4: Religious Belief, Literature and Dogma ===

If any religion were true, we could reasonably expect it to produce some ideas and beliefs that people couldn't have thought up by themselves. Similarly for 'holy texts', and the rules and practices that derive from them. In fact though, religions only produce what we would expect humans to imagine or decide for themselves, on the basis of aspects of human nature such as superstition, moral judgments, xenophobia and so on. There is no sign of any divine influence here.

Religious literature, if divinely inspired, ought to be factually correct and free of contradictions, immoral ideas and absurdities. None of the holy texts fit the bill.

=== 5: Society and Culture ===

It's an observable fact that people overwhelmingly adopt the religion of their family and culture. If there was any external truth to religion, which human beings could perceive with some kind of supernatural sense, then we could reasonably expect there to be some consistency in religious belief. Instead, the distrubution of different religious beliefs is exactly as we would expect it to be if this were pure mythology, handed down through family and culture like any other kind of purely fictional story.

=== 6: Intellectual and Moral Progress ===

Religion has consistently been the enemy of intellectual progress, suppressing rational investigation of the world where it disagrees with and thus endangers religious belief (often by torture and death). There has never been, to the best of my knowledge, one single fact about the world that was brought to us by divine inspiration rather than rational investigation. How could this be, if religion were a source of truth? Religion has also consistently been the undisputed cause of much conflict, discrimination and persecution in the world, belying the existence of any kind of benevolent or moral guardian of the world.

=== 7: Rational Explanation for Religious Belief ===

As part of our evolutionary 'toolkit' of survival strategies, we have a highly developed awareness of other entities in our environment - We often notice human faces in carpet patterns, rabbit-shaped clouds and so on. There is more survival value in seeing what really *is* there, and also seeing some things that *aren't* really there, than in missing things that really are there and going hungry, or worse, ending up as someone else's lunch.

The consequence of this undeniably true aspect of human nature is that we have a natural tendency to imagine 'agents' (intelligent entities) behind natural phenomena and events in our own lives that aren't really there - i.e. gods and goddesses, demons, angels, spirits - a whole menagerie of supernatural characters. Society and culture binds up these characters with our wishes and fears, our desires for dominance and submission and shared identity, and we end up with religious belief and ritual and dogma, in thousands of different flavours throughout the world and throughout history. Religion is formalised superstition - It's just a common flaw in human nature, rather like the way we see optical illusions. We can account for the existence of religious belief perfectly well with this fact-based, rational explanation, rather than believing that there really is a supernatural realm of existence.

Answer 2

Currently, I am an atheist. Let me first off say that to believe in ANYthing in this world you need to have faith. Whether it be gravity, magnetism, electricity, whatever. You may be able to see the results and you can give "evidence" showing why something means something else, but in the end, it comes down to a belief whether the evidence is true or not. Nextly, I have drawn the conclusion that there is no God or higher power based on logical assessments of historical data (or lack of) and a premise that things are because they just are. It is a faith based belief you are correct. However, I already said that everything is a faith based belief.

If I were given evidence of the existence of a God or higher power, I would of course, logically assess it and make a decision based on that. I don't totally disallow for the possibility of being wrong. I simply await proof that I am.

Answer 3

What logic is there for uncertainty?

Is there proof of pink unicorns? No, therefore they do not exist.

There is no uncertainty in that statement. So why would the following statement be uncertain?

Is the proof of god? No, therefore no god exists.

True atheism is not based on faith, one definition of faith is belief that is not based on proof. I deny that a god exists because there is no proof.

The only reason why people have a problem with a strong atheist, like myself, is that the concept of a god has been around for over 10,000 years. It is so ingrained in our society that even though there is no proof, there is doubt.

That's not too say that I am not a spiritual person, just not religious

Answer 4

I am curious... what is a 'hardcore atheist'? I am not familiar with that therm.

Your assertion that atheism is 'faith-based' is patently ridiculous. 'Faith' (wishful, magical thinking)serves as a substitute for evidence, and supports 'belief', in lieu of knowledge. An atheist rejects faith and belief. There is no necessity to produce 'convincing evidence' to support the premise of atheism... which is that there is insufficient evidence. More clearly... you contend that atheism is faith-based because we can't produce convincing evidence that there isn't sufficient evidence.

Sweet.

I think you need to take a break.

Answer 5

The difference is that many atheists base their lack of belief on scientific evidence. Since there is no evidence either way, then it is safe to apply Occam's Razor. If however, evidence for the existence of God was found, many atheists would be willing to admit their mistake. If conclusive evidence against God were to be found, theists would still believe, citing "Satanic Conspiracies" or some such nonsense.

Answer 6

One of the problems with True Believers (or True Non-Believers) is that they aren't willing to recognize their own fallibility.

There's no "convincing evidence" for anything that's based on faith. That's why it's called "faith."

There's probably more convincing evidence for atheism than for belief in a god.

But to be spiritual, one doesn't have to believe in any particular spirit.

Answer 7

I don't agree with you in the least.

It seems that you fail to understand the true definition of atheism. Look it up in ANY dictionary. There are two primary definitions, one is the denial of and the other is a lack of belief in the supernatural. I am a hardcore atheist who subscribes to the latter.

Furthermore, your tone is incredibly sanctimonious. Get off your high horse, mister.

Answer 8

No, our belief in the lack of a god, is due to the fact that there is no evidence or reason to believe in one.

Occam's razor state "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity." Or adding more variables than needed to explain something is pointless.

If the Universe can be explained without a god (which it can), one should be inserted.

Many people will counter with "Well than where did the Universe come from"

But an equally valid response is "Well than where did god come from"

And if you respond that god is eternal, well than, why can't the Universe be eternal.

Answer 9

Actually, our arguments are much different than theirs. Christians don't make absolute claims of truth based on faulty logic.

By inferential logic, one can become a Christian. That is not true of atheism. There is no logically valid argument for the non-existence of God.

NOTE: I've taken the above arguments and changed one word to prove the point. If you give me a thumbs down, you must also give a thumbs down to the atheists who made the original statements. Well, unless you like hypocrisy.....

Answer 10

Sure. Neither side can produce any evidence for or against a supreme being. But Atheism is not faith based.

Answer 11

Actually, our arguments are much different than theirs. Atheists don't make absolute claims of truth based on faulty logic.

And, btw, there is no "premise of atheism". Atheists are just not convinced by any evidence yet provided for the existence of any gods. We have zero belief in the existence of gods.