Whats the logic behind being an atheist?

Question

I must admit am not an atheist but am no fan of organized religion either.

When studying biology, astronomy, and physics it is extremely hard to deny the hand of a higher being, wether spiritual or intelligent energy.

The universe is so complex, chaotic in certain aspects, but through it all it is amazingly organized and predictable.
Most scientists are against religion for the obvious reasons but i sincerely doubt that most deny an intelligent hand in creation. Science is humanitys jewel for knowledge but the more we pry into understanding life and existance the more complex and amazing it becomes.

Whats behind nature?

For example in physics there two forces that keep the atoms together as well as the electromagnetic force, they work in harmony to create order in the atomic level. In the cosmos the way gravity controls the orbits and stablishes order in the celestial bodies, it is truly amazing.

What lies behind these forces?

Well, there had to be a beginning for either the universe or God. This is true. But which sounds more logical, that out of nothing order, life, and natural laws were born, or that a force or energy which we do not comprehend becouse of our limited grasp of reality created everything with an undeniable order and harmony that set in motion a universe which evolves with consciousness.

the Grit,

You are thinking with an in the box mentality. Break all notions of what you perceive to be reality. As science progresses more and more, specially quantum physics we are finding that everything revolves around consciousness. That conciousness itself is the perceiver and creator of everything.

Now ask yourself a question, Where did you get your consciousness from?

Answer 1

Basically that they dont believe in God. They might have a scientific belief such as the fish theory or the evolution of monkeys. IDK

Answer 2

When you say atheist, I'm taking that you refer to people who do not have a religion. Religious atheist would include Buddhists.

Well, there can be many reasons why someone would be an atheist.
There are those who see that there are so many religions in the world and since almost all of them are contradictory, at most only one can be correct. However seeing the large number of religions, that is already quite unlikely, so it might probably be better to be without one.
There are those people who think that the traditions and beliefs of religions do not make much sense, and so drop any religion they have.
There are those who are brought up without religion. The list of reasons can go on and on.

Of course there would be those who became atheists because of the progress that Science had made in explaining the way the world works, from earthquakes to the origin of life. They felt that then, there was no longer any need for any explanation by the supernatural and adopted a naturalistic view. Hence, they no longer are religious.

I understand that there is much that is left unresolved in Science, but I don't think that scientist can in only a short time of a few hundred years find the answer to everything. Sure there will be things we don't understand, and maybe we will never understand such things, but why do we want to use religion to explain them. We once used religion to explain the origin of humans, but then it turns out that evidence was for evolution. Why then should we use religion to explain all the other things of the universe? Why don't we just leave them for future scientist to solve, bit by bit?
I can even give you a good reason why some things might never be solved, that is because the human brain was never meant to solve these problems, and even if scientists can find the answer, many people just might not be able to grasp the concept, eg. Einstein's relativity. The human brain was specially evolved to solve real life problems, when put into very different situations, the brain just can't work out the solutions.
Now another question I would like you to ask yourself is: Why do you want a reason?
It is only human for us to ask the question "Why?", it's just a sort of curiosity in us that keep wanting more and more explanations. However, is that really necessary? Why does electromagnetic force require an explanation? Can't it work just because it does so?
You see, this is just another way our brains are conditioned to work, and where we can't find an explanation from evidence, we try to make one up. And (no insult meant) religion, legends and myths just happen to be the few explanations that we have so far made up.
I urge you to not be impatient and just consider waiting for Science to get the answers, probably it's the most reasonable option that we may have on our hands.

Answer 3

Atheism is first of all the recognition that many visualized gods have done nothing for the betterment of earth and man except suggest that we practice certain "good" things. It has been a complete failure and does support a serious questioning of any god's existence.

Another logical point is that even though some of us claim to having heard the word of a god, no god has spoken to the atheist and he sees no other evidence.

Another point: The universe and earth are indifferent to our existence excepting miracles which seem to be impossible to verify.

Another point: No where in our rational thinking does the hint of god appear except in the question of why or where did we/things come from. This can be explained away completely with the understanding that the expressions of value exhibited by all things are self directed and creative in consequences.

There are no doubt many other thoughts which bear upon the issue. But the most important realization of all is to realize that the need to name another or one's self an atheist or believer is a divisive act indicating a fundamental ignorance about the nature of life.

"Now ask yourself a question, Where did you get your consciousness from?”

Every thing/value is aware. Every thing/value prioritizes actions. The question is to what level. Conscious awareness arises from the need of more complex values to prioritize actions in order to achieve more complex gratifications.

Answer 4

That is a good question, and one that I don't really know the answer to. I can speculate however. Atheists seem to be very absorbed into scientific proof and there really is no science proving God (Intelligent Design is not science). However, there is no science explaining the beginning of time, the beginning of matter, or really the beginning of life either. I could get into the science of all this, but it would be way too long. So, I don't really know how atheists can say "nothing proves that God exists" when they cannot say definitively "this is how time, matter, and life began". My best geuss would be that they choose only to believe what they see. However, using that "logic", I don't think I could ever believe something that I didn't know the origin of.

Answer 5

How I answer the question depends on your definition of atheist (atheism). I am an atheist as it relates to the theistic God/deity. The thesitic God is defined as having specific characterstics including: omniscience, omnibenevolence, omnipotence, atemporal, omnipresent. This God in contradictory in nature due to "natural evil" (not evil that is produced by humans but the evil that exists in the natural world . . . imagine a child walking through the woods on a rainy night on his way home as fast a possible. Lightning erupts and shatters a tree that fall atop of him. There he lay for weeks drinking stagnant water from the puddles around him as he slowly starves to death. Hours after his excruiating life ends his mother, who has been searching for him without rest, happens upon his corpse as it is being devoured by a vulture . . . this is an example of natural evil). As it relates to this God, I am an atheist. His characteristics and contradictory as it relates to the world in which we live.

If on the other hand you are asking about a generic undefined creator God. Then I suppose I must claim to be an agnostic. But then I ask, what good would be found in worshipping or postulating such an unresponsive and uncaring creator being? However, I still believe Occam's Razor and the idea that "No good evidence to believe, is good evidence not to believe" hold true. So definitially I would be an agnostic in this situation, but ideally and for all intents and purposes an atheist. Might there be a undefined creator god? Yes. Is that a meaningful state? Probably not.

However, you ask in one of your clarifications if a natural universe of order existing (and possibly always existing) is more probable than a creator setting this universe into existence. I believe the former is the more likely because of the aforementioned Occam's Razor. Postulating entities beyond necessity has never been a good way to explain phenomena.

Answer 6

nature has an amazing way of keeping things in harmony. the food chain, the way things will decompose and create food for other animals, the way certain animals can camoflogue (??) itself...its all a delicate balance that is created by nature. it is proven, it is seen, it is real. no higher power can be said to be the same.

also, think of this: anyone ever start a war over sharks eating fish? or what about trees in the rain forest growing so tall and creating a balcony to prevent harm from coming to the undergrowth and the animals that live there? Now think of all the wars created over god.....which would you rather believe in and trust? nature or something that is supposed to be all good but has a tendancy to bring out the worst in people?

Check out the Book The Last Templar. It touches on all these issues, on all points of views. Great read

Answer 7

Religion provides no answers either. Creation is suggestive of a creator, but not as to what kind. As much as some groups would like it to, the argument can't be reduced to: things exist, so the Bible (or Koran, etc.) must be true. There are many reasons to dismiss holy texts as being the work of superstitious people.

Where does that leave us? There may be some kind of creator, but it hasn't left indisputable proof of its existence and certainly doesn't demand that you live your life a certain way. "God" is so unknowable that in practical terms, it's as if there isn't one.

What it comes down to is that people shouldn't need an external judge to decide to be good to each other.

Answer 8

Your god solution comes down to one question an answer. Q: How can the universe be here without a god? A: It can't, god created it.

The answer, which is an old one I believe, is of course another question. Who created God? The only answer you have is that God must have created himself or always been. Either of these answers could just as easily be applied to the universe, as far as I can see. Which means that god is unnecessary. I don't think it's impossible, but I like the solution with the least amount of complexity, so I go for the godless solution.

kthxbye

Answer 9

Many scientists believe in God and hope to "prove" God exists. First off, believing in a religion and believing in a higher power are not the same thing.

The logic behind being an atheist is there is no scientific proof of "god" as most religions describe it.

Not to burst anyone's bubble but science will never prove what western religion depicts as god.

I believe "proof" of god will come when we deepen our knowledge of the universe, quantum physics, energy and consciousness...these will be key pieces to scientifically exploring and understanding god. This is god the creative energy force and consciousness...not god the big bearded man in the sky...big difference.

Answer 10

You are using the word logic in an interesting way and I am slowly learning what that word means here. In Philosophy classes the word is used to mean the rules by which discussion and debate are put forward, here it means something like "how does he think and feel as he assumes the role of......" That said, atheist just means someone who has become convinced that the evidence against the existence of God/gods/deity is strong enough to provide a belief. An atheist believes that God does not exit. Can he prove it? No, because you can't prove a negative. Does he believe his evidence sufficient to support his belief? You bet, and if you listen he/she will tell you what evidence he/she is considering.

We never argue over the things that we can settle by any simple means. We don't argue over multiplication tables or if the world is round. (oops there is a flat earth society...sorry)

Answer 11

This is more easily understandable if one considers the actual scale of the components of an atom. If one takes into account the fact that the neutrons, protons and electrons of an atom actually have huge spaces between them it becomes clear that the atoms that make up seemingly solid objects are made up of 99+ percent empty space.

This alone does not seem too important till you add the idea that the atoms that make up seemingly solid objects are more of a loose conglomeration that share a similar attraction but never really touch each other.

At first glance this does not really seem relevant, but closer analysis reveals that this adds a tremendous amount of empty space to solid objects that are already made up of atoms that are 99 percent space. When so-called solid objects are seen in this light it becomes apparent that they can in no way be the seemingly solid objects they appear to be.

We ourselves are not exceptions to this phenomenon.

These seemingly solid objects are more like ghostly images that we interpret as solid objects based on our perceptual conclusions.

From this we must conclude that Perception is some sort of a trick that helps us to take these ghostly images and turn them into a world we can associate and interact with. This clever device seems to be a creation of our intellect that enables us to interact with each other in what appears to be a three dimensional reality.

I hope that helps to answered your question.

Love and blessings Don