Please, serious, informed answers only. I consider myself an agnostic. The question is for those who embrace atheism only. Thanks!
2006-09-23 09:58:24 · 5 answers · asked by James R 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The primary 'argument' for atheism is that no argument is needed.
When one posits a statement such as 'God Exists' or 'Jesus is the Messiah' or 'The Bible is literal truth' or 'God created the universe', it is incumbent upon THEM to then prove the statement and provide evidence. In logic, there is no expectation for a person to prove a negative, therefore again it is the responsibility of the person making a statement about the validity of a belief that then must prove that belief to be true.
There are vast amounts of factual, provable, repeatable evidence in support of most scientifically established truths, and there is none for religious truths. The atheists view of the world is based on verifiable observation, methodical research and rationally arrived at factual information, the religious view is based on 'faith'.
This is the basis of the 'arguments' for atheism.
2006-09-23 10:07:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agnostics do not affirm nor deny the existence of God. It's a technical term to distinguish between an affirmative statement, such as "God does not exist" and "I don't have data, so I can't conclude that God does, or does not exist."
Lack of evidence to warrant disbelief really has a lot less to do with lack of evidence and more to do with the premise that evidence for the existence of God can't exist. The argument looks like this:
1.) The natural world is all that is knowable
2.) Therefore the supernatural (God) is not knowable.
3.) Therefore there is no evidence for the existence of the supernatural (God).
4.) Therefore there is not reason to believe in the supernatural world.
The conclusion is the same as the premise, which denies that the supernatural is knowable. One could conclude straight from the premise, rather than from the lack of knowledge, that there is no reason to believe in the supernatural, so it is circular.
On can, however, disprove God by conditionally affirming God's existence and showing how it leads to logical contradictions. This is in essence affirming the negative by disproving the affirmative, rather than remaining agnostic on the matter. Some atheists choose this route.
2006-09-26 05:53:36 · answer #2 · answered by The1andOnlyMule 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If God existed then surely the world would not be the way it is! This is an argument of those who do not believe in God. They ignore the possibility that perhaps God would have no reason for interfearing. I dont understand how someone could not believe in some intellegant desighn behind life and the universe. Just look around. I do however, understand how many do not believe God as is often portraid in religion...as religious Gods are often needy, angry beings, demanding our love, fear, and affection. Why would God be so much like a person? Wouldn't God be a bit more evolved in mentality than us? After all...he/she/it did create the universe.
2006-09-23 10:07:52 · answer #3 · answered by tjcsonofallnations 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No arguments are necessary for atheism... it is simply that there are no compelling arguments for the existence of god.
You claim to be agnostic... which means that you feel that you do not have sufficient knowledge to ascertain whether god exists or not... which implies that you do not believe in god... which (if true) makes you an atheist, too.
2006-09-23 10:05:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not embrace aethiesm, but I think I can give you some insight on their way of thinking. Mostly you will get- support for evolution, the actual age of the earth, and why doesnt God show himself if he is here.
They all can be explained away when you look at the bible.
If you want to talk- waterboy@aemail4u.com
2006-09-23 10:03:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋