Atheists is Atheism the logical choice?

Question

What's logical about it? I'm not asking this in an insulting way by any stretch of the imagination. I'm just looking for some insight. Thanks. Let's just say that an Agnostic was looking to decide whether to stay Agnostic or become an Atheist. What would you tell that person to help them possibly make that decision? Respectful answers please.

Answer 1

Well, I came to it as a matter of course, without meaning to. I've always been a spiritualist. I am now a Neo-Pagan Taoist and also a strong atheist.

What happened to me was, I was helping someone do a thesis on the rhetoric used when people describe near-death experiences. We studied accounts from people in Western culture as well as Eastern. What we noticed was that although their descriptions were entirely different, seen in a symbolic sense, what they were experiencing meant something very similar.

I concluded, then, that deities and other spiritual constructs are really metaphors - a language for something for which there is no language, symbols for something our minds can't comprehend. They don't exist really, they are just our way of trying to define the indefinable.

This made so much sense to me I haven't ever been able to think of deities in the same way again. Voila, an atheist is born.

The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.
--Tao Te Ching

Answer 2

It is rational and logical to be agnostic. Without clear evidence either way, it is not necessarily logical to make definitive statements either in favour of, or against the existence of theistic supernatural entities.

However stating that the lack of evidence is more likely the result of their being no theistic supernatural entity is more logical than claiming that not only IS there a supernatural theistic entity, but he created the world in six days, has long robes and a fluffy beard, and doesn't want anyone to eat pigs or be gay.

My own atheism is not so much a matter of logic as it is a gut feeling that no human religion is even vaguely close to being right.

Agnosticism is a perfectly fine, logical statement on belief. I wouldn't try to make an agnostic decide that they must become an atheist.

For example, I'm agnostic about the existence of bigfoot. I really, really, really, really, really doubt that it exists, but I'm willing to entertain the possibility of that giant anthropoids have survived hidden in the wilderness, undetected until now. There would have to be some pretty major evidence that they don't exist for me to become completely 'atheistic' on the bigfoot topic.

Answer 3

The argument that atheism is the logical option could quality pass like this. Let us expect we don't utterly have an understanding of how the arena works. Let us additionally expect we're this sort of small side of the universe that any truly fullness will most likely ceaselessly be past us, despite the fact that we can as a rule have an understanding of excess of we can ever have got to recognize from an operational point of view. (How many black holes do we relatively have got to fear approximately within the close time period?) Good finding out could indicate utilizing the smallest quantity of assumptions approximately how the arena works. If accepting a God isn't to be an assumption, then it will have to be supported by means of the impartial proof. Things like scriptures, whether or not the Gita, the Koran or the Bible aren't relatively proof. They are extra observations by means of persons who've already made up our minds how the arena works after which conform their perspectives to suit their preconceptions. So we could pass with the smallest set of assumptions and no longer presume the lifestyles of a God. Then it falls to every faith to exhibit why their ideals are affirmatively proper. Moreso, should you lack the specified notion are you able to nonetheless role on the earth. If so, what significance or role does that notion upload. They have to, like all well proponent, end up their are proper and the countervailing aspects of view are fallacious situated on impartial proof. So, should you think within the teeth fairy, it's as much as you to furnish impartial proof of the correctness of your view, or in Zeus or in Jesus or as within the shipment cults, that the shipment will come. Atheism is the logical option within the absence of compelling observable proof. Accepting the teeth fairy isn't a logical option, nor is being a Christian. Simply going along with your intestine additionally is not proof and that's the definition of illogical. It is logical given that we have no idea how the arena works. If we did recognize then if a God exists, that could be the logical option. If one does no longer, then that could be the logical option.

Answer 4

I personally believe that atheism is less logical than agnosticism (and, I am neither). There are plenty of irrational religious beliefs out there. However, one cannot conclude that something does not exist based on a lack of evidence. To do so presumes our knowledge is already at its peak, which it clearly is not. I could conclude that whales did not exist because I had never seen any evidence of one existing. But, if I did not know where to look for a whale in the first place, my conclusion would not be based on rationality.

I do not believe in god, by the way. However, I do not believe that it can be concluded that there is no god with science, due to the nature of the belief, and it certainly cannot be proven that there is nothing beyond the physical at this point. Until things are proven one way or another, a true rational mind will not presume to know the answer definitely.

Answer 5

If you are agnostic you are already an atheist.

One thing supporting atheism is the point that there is not even an accepted definition of God.
Almost all organised religions specifically deny that their God is even definable.
Unless there is a definition there is nothing to believe in.,and no sense trying to discuss it, unless it is with the purpose of finding a definition.

Everytime anybody tried defining their Gods they were far too easy to disprove, that is why they hide them from inspection by claiming mystery as a vitrue.

Answer 6

It's logical for me. I'm not the type of atheist to try to encourage people one way or another. I think we have to follow our brains and our heart for what works for us. If an agnostic asked I would just say that there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of a god or gods. I would tell them that ultimately the decision is theirs to make.

Answer 7

Like I've said so many times before, Agnostic isn't a middle ground between believer and non. It is a sub belief, which in reality everyone technically is because no one knows how the universe came to be.

I'm Agnostic-Atheist

Answer 8

I personally think that Agnosticism is the most logical choice. I understand why a person would be inclined to not believe in something that can't be proven, but at the same time such things as a higher being can not be disproven either. As we all know, there are plenty of things that exist that we can't see.

Answer 9

Disbelief is always the rational default in the absence of testable evidence. If I tell you a giant pink rabbit is standing behind you, and you turn about and see nothing, what's the most rational response, assume I'm demented, or keep an "open mind" about invisible giant pink rabbits standing behind you, or worse yet, do what theists do and fervently believe the giant pink bunny is there despite the evidence simply because I say so? Because the theist position is based on mere say so and has no foundation of testable evidence, whether Christian, Jewish, Moslem, Hindu or whatever.

Answer 10

Look at religion and tell me how believing in a talking burning bush, talking snakes, giants, a stick that turns into a snake, a sea parting, a man born of immaculate conception the son of a god, a man walking on water, water turning into wine, and a man rising from the dead is EVER logical.

Atheism is logical because they don't devote their entire existance to fantasy, they devote it to logical questions that can be answered with proof.

I know which one I choose because I don't let fear rule me.