Keith Russell

Devilnaut said:
Edit to add: I suppose someone could state that they are 100% sure that no Gods exist, and they would still be an atheist. Their belief would be irrational, however.

[b]Keith: I disagree. I view 'God' as an invalid concept; 'God' not only does not exist, but 'God' cannot exist.

(The concept of 'God' is like a 'square circle', or a 'nothingness': an impossibility, a concept which cannot correspond to reality.)

I don't find this view irrational in the least.

Keith.

Kip

Hey Ben,

Allow me to add my two cents.

1. Despite your experience, Descartes logic is NOT "generally agreed upon". Not only does virtually everyone, including most theologians, think that Descartes' proof of God's existence is mistaken, most modern philosophers also agree that even Descartes skepticism was mistaken, and only disagree about "how" Descartes was wrong. Earlier philosophers, for example Hume, thought that Descartes' radical doubt was absurd.

2. The word atheism can have different meanings. The more correct, historical meaning is simply a lack of belief in god(s). Most of the atheists here are knowledgable enough to insist upon this weaker definition. There is, however, the more popular notion, according to which atheism implies strong, or positive, atheism (the claim that God does not exist). I understand your point, though, and the question is relevant.

To answer your question, then, I would say that most atheists do not claim to be absolutely certain that God (whatever that word means because there are various inconsistent definitions) does not exist. We do not, at least I do not, pretend to "disprove" the existence of God in any absolute or mathematical way. I do however, find the circumstantial evidence that religions are human inventions to be overwhelming and quite compelling. Of course, Descartes believed that he could prove God's existence even though he could not trust his senses. According to Descartes, the atheist's hands are tied. But again, Descartes was wrong.

Allow me to mention just a few of the problems that religions have (just to refresh my memory):

1. Not only do all religions contradict each other, but most religious people are just as certain that other religions are wrong as they are certain that God exists. Religious people usually do not say "God surely exists, but my God might be the wrong one". They say "my God, and only God, exists". So all religious people passionately testify against each other and there does not appear to be any reason to

2. Religious belief is a approximate function of location. People in India tend to believe the local religions there, people in Texas tend to be more Christian. These concentrations are very strong. This suggests that religious belief is more of a function of where you live and who your parents are, than of the evidence supporting your religious belief. Religious people do not seem to sit down, survey the evidence for all the world's religions, and choose the correct one. Rather, people tend to believe what they are told.

3. Most religions give rewards and solve problems that science has yet to solve. For example, most revealed religions provide a belief in some afterlife, which means that people do not really die, but "live forever in paradise". Religions also provide Creation stories to explain why humans exist and give them importance (usually claiming that the universe was created for humans). All of these claims are suspicious because these are precisely what people would want to believe (that our lives are meaningful and that we will never die) and the claims are not really proven, only asserted without proof. The Catholic Church recently apologized for the mistakes in the Galileo affair.

4. Most religious ideas of God or Gods are strikingly similar to human in appearance and behavior. Whenever Gods appear, the shape is usually human (for example Jesus). Gods become jealous, angry, or verbose. All of these are consistent with the idea that religions are human inventions, but if Gods really exist, how suprising that he should be so much like us, but more smarter and stronger.

There are many other arguments strongly suggesting humans invented the idea of God, like the idea of Santa Claus, but never stopped believing.

Devilnaut

I don't view it as irrational either, as long as you're not 100% certain. Technically speaking, to be 100% sure of anything is irrational, since you cannot account for every possibility imaginable.

Really, I was just nit-picking.

Goliath

gruveguy,

I don't think so. Atheism is absolutely nothing more than the lack of belief that any gods exist. If you claim that atheism implies a lack of belief in "absolute truth," (whatever that means) then you must prove your claim.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Devilnaut

Doesn't the simple belief in the existence of an objective reality entail belief in "absolute truth"?

Kharakov

It does if your system of symbolic logic (language) equates objective reality with absolute truth. Symbolic logic gets a little blurry when you describe all of existence with a pair of words (such as "Low Resolution" or "absolute truth"). Especially when you consider that "all of existence" is contained by all of existence and defines all of existence...

Keith Russell

Devil said:
"Technically speaking, to be 100% sure of anything is irrational, since you cannot account for every possibility imaginable."

Devil, are you one hundred percent certain of this?

Keith.

Devilnaut

I'd like to think I am, but I suppose I could simply be deluded in some way that I'm not aware of.

Autonemesis

Incorrect.

Is not making any statement to be considered making a statement? If the atheist answers the question "Does God exist?" with "I don't know and I don't care", is he making any statement about something external to himself? I don't think so.

Of course you do not. Billions of people down through history have lived their lives without ever questioning their existence. I personally never considered the question "Why am I here?" until Mormon missionaries brought it up. Then as now, I thought it was a rather pointless question.

Incorrect. I can reason from any number of suppositions that I may or may not actually believe in, and come to logical conclusions about those suppositions. The rules of logic operate whether or not you accept the ideas being reasoned about.

Yeah. And?

Besides, what worldview are you speaking of? Atheism is not a worldview based on the non-existence of god. Atheist is an adjective that refers viewpoints that omit any reference to a god or gods. It's like singling out cars that are not green in color. "Not green" doesn't really tell us anything at all about what color the car is.

Atheism is the same way. It's the semantic equivalent of "not green."

Keith Russell

Devil:

So, you would 'like to be' one hundred percent certain that to be one hundred percent certain of something is irrational?

Have you really thought this through?

Keith.