Atheism: Please explain ...?

Question

I was just told by a friend that Atheism is based on a theory known as the "something-nothing" theory. It goes like this: the earth exists because of a million different things: atoms, electrons, big-bang, gravity, etc. But if any one of these things didn't exist the world wouldnt exist. How can this be a basis for Atheism, the belief in no God, and from what I can find more importantly, the belief in nothing? How can you believe that nothing exists on a greater plane if we exist?? How is this a plausible theory??

This is not meant to be insulting, this is meant to gain knowledge. Please only provide real answers and nothing such as "Athiests are stupid".

Answer 1

Yikes! If I had to study that hard to become an atheist, I'd be a christian yet today.

Answer 2

actually your friend was a bit off the mark.

atheism as such means simply that a person does not believe in the existence of any god. note please that that is something different than believing that there is no god. the point is that we atheists do not believe at all. we try to know. and where no certain knowledge can be gained, we collect what solid data we can find and make an educated guess, pending further insights.
and yes, it works quite well. although it IS much more work than blind belief... :)
as for the something-nothing theory... if any of the many aspects that make up our universe was different, then the whole universe would very likely be different, but it would also very likely still exist.
would we exist in it? maybe, maybe not... the truth is, the whole thought is moot, because the universe is just the way it is, and we are just the way we are... and that is the long and the short of it. we can theorize about it all being different, but we dont need to worry ourselves over it.

Answer 3

Three things;
1: Quit capitalizing *atheist*. It is not a religion.

2: atheism simply means "without god(s)," it is about the lack of belief in God(yours) or other Gods. There are some points of logic that have gotten general concensus, but not universal agreement or even acceptance. There are atheists who follow spiritual paths like Buddhism or Daoism that need no Gods.

3: Trying to group atheists together is like trying to herd cats. Neither atheists or cats are herd animals. They are too independant and just go in all different directions.

OK, now about physics theories. If an atheist talks about physics he might have heard a bit about it, he might have read a little of it, he might even have a degree in it. He is likely trying to use it to illustrate a point. The problem is that modern physics is too weird to explain in common language, and most modern theories are just mathematical equations. They make poor analogies unless the person hearing them is at the same level as the person saying them. The physics was wierd enough that the early physicists used patterns from eastern mysticism to talk about it. That is why so much of it sounds like something a zen master would say.

Keep in mind that science is about how things happen. Religion is supposed to be about why we do things.
Religion has faith.
Science has doubt.
Religion believes it has an ultimate truth.
Science is a continuing process of getting things less wrong.
God has not explained anything(yet)
Science does not explain God(yet)

I hope this helps.
atheists can be pretty smart

CHOOSE REALITY

Answer 4

i think your trying to refer to the 'anthropic principle' and where did all of this come from if it wasn't designed, the argument from incredulity. yes billions of factors came into play for us to be here, but those factors arise from an underlying simplicity. that underlying simplicity will be a mathematical expression that explains and powers all of the natural laws in this universe. it is the unifying principle which ties together all of the forces that make our universe. it is the 'holy grail' of science. if one little figure or number was different in that simple mathematical expression the universe we know and love would not be here, perhaps it would be just a sea of photons. but it isn't different and we are here today to witness that. if chance were involved at all it is in maybe how that underlying unifying principle condensed out of the universe as it first began to inflate in the 'big bang'. once that simple principle was established, the universe, in a certain sense, became deterministic in that matter, stars and galaxies would form because the natural laws which are the expression of the underlying simplicity function that way. stars would grow old and die, they would create heavier elements as the grew old and exploded in novas. gravity would clump these clouds together and a new generation of stars would be born rich in the heavier elements that could form organic molecules and rocky planets. given enough time and the right environment organic molecules have the potential to form into life. life did not miraculously appear from nowhere at the hands of a creator or otherwise, the laws of nature had established that possibility from the first moment of this universes existance. there is also a good possibility that somewher else in this universe some other intelligences are struggling with this concept too. i only hope that they are not so limited by the idea of exclusivity that so many humans are. the fact that we as individuals and a species are looking out and pondering the existance of the universe is random chance, but the fact that this universe has produced an intelligent life form that can do this also is an implicit possibility, it's just lucky that we are able to do it here and now. if you want to see how underlying simplicity can lead to both order and chaos i suggest you google mandelbrot sets and see how a simple mathematical formula can lead to beautiful complexity.

Answer 5

Basically atheism comes from the fact that science in the West set out, from the 17th century onwards, with philosophers like Descartes and later the Encyclopaedists, to try to give explanations of scientific phenomena based on empirical data, that is on what could be observed by the investigators' senses. This method proved to be more and more successful, and many phenomena that had previously puzzled people and received "supernatural" explanations were explained by the new scientific knowledge without any recourse to God. Nowadays when people study science in school they tend to notice that science never speaks of God. So they conclude that the idea of God is "unscientific", and therefore (and here's the rub) mythical, childish, a lie. Actually this conclusion is a logical fallacy. For there can be no mention of God in Western science - he (she or it) was excluded from the very basis of the system of thought in the first place. But logically that does not mean God does not exist, merely that science never concerned itself to answer that question and is not really equipped to do so. The Christian creed runs "I believe in all things visible and invisible". Science essentially deals with the visible, what is traceable through our sense impressions. If a creator has deliberately constructed our senses so that we are not conscious of the "invisible world" then the world of God and the world of experimental science are destined never to meet. Nowadays most educated people stick to science. They trust the evidence of their senses. That might just be a mistake.

Answer 6

I'm an atheist but I never heard of this theory yet. I really cannot follow it as you describe it but maybe I'm missing something. Anyway, atheism is not sort of a standardized theory or dogma, it is just a summary term for not believing in deities. And the absence of belief does not need a particular foundation - as long as there is no reason to believe, I don't.

Answer 7

How is 'god' a plausible theory? The big bang has evidence and is a reasonable explanation. Some guy who making stuff out of thin air is not. You cannot call atheism implausible when god is even more so. What is more realistic: Some guy making humans out of thin air, or minor mutations in our very close cousin, apes, eventually evolving into humans? Number two, no duh.
There is NO evidence for god. Zip, zero, nada, gooseggs. So why dedicate my life to praying to something that probably doesn't even exist? How come when humans get something wrong, they have sinned, it's their fault, but when they do something right, they praise god and believe he was the one that helped them do it? No, I flat out refuse to live like that. I will take responsibility for my own actions, good and bad. I don't need some fairy tale guy in the sky to help me.

Answer 8

Atheism is the disbelief[1] in the existence of any deities.[2] It is contrasted with theism, the belief in a God or gods. Atheism is commonly defined as the positive belief that deities do not exist, or as the deliberate rejection of theism.[3][4][5] However, others—including most atheistic philosophers and groups—define atheism as the simple absence of belief in deities[6][7][8] (cf. nontheism), thereby designating many agnostics, and people who have never heard of gods, such as newborn children, as atheists as well.[9][10] In recent years, some atheists have adopted the terms strong and weak atheism to clarify whether they consider their stance one of positive belief (strong atheism) or the mere absence of belief (weak atheism).[11][12][13]

Many self-described atheists share common skeptical concerns regarding supernatural claims, citing a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities. Other rationales for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. Although atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism, rationalism, and naturalism, there is no one ideology or set of behaviors that all atheists adhere to.[14][15][16]

In Western culture, atheists are frequently assumed to be irreligious or non-spiritual.[17] However, some religious and spiritual beliefs, such as several forms of Buddhism, have been described by outside observers as conforming to the broader, negative definition of atheism due to their lack of any participating deities.[18][19] Atheism is also sometimes equated with antitheism (opposition to theism) or antireligion (opposition to religion), despite many atheists not holding such views.

Answer 9

How can you believe that nothing exists on a greater plane if we exist??

I think it's harder to believe there is a different plain of existance. As for something-nothing, all the matter and energy today can just as easily always existed as your God does.

There is defenitly a greater force than us, but not necessarily a creator on a different plain.

Answer 10

your friend is stupid, well maybe lets be polite and call him blissfully ignorant.

atheism is very very simple. We don't accept the existence of unseen deities without credible evidence. Emphasis on credible (a burned cheese sandwich that look like Jesus doesn't cut it with me as "miraculous", nor a tree or anything else that has a perfectly good natural explanation) You are trying to prove the super-natural remember.

There is no something-nothing theory. It sounds like a garbled version of the Anthropic argument. (look it up yourself)

No atheist comes to the realization that god is imaginary like that. We don't "believe in nothing"...

we just don't accept ON FAITH ALONE that god is real.

Answer 11

atheism is not the belief in nothing. Atheism only pertains to a diety and HIS existence, not the existence of physical or mental nothingness.
Our belief is that a God does not exist. We exist, but God does not......plain and simple.
Atheism is not a religion either. It contains no diety, therefore cannot be religious.