Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Totalitarianist · 07-21-2002, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Synaesthesia:
<strong>Many atheists become theist or vice versa when they discover the irrationality of the basis of their belief.</strong>

How is lacking a belief in the existence and non-existence of God irrational? That is a kind Atheism: lack of belief in a God or Gods; not necessarily active denial. Please tell me how that specific form of Atheism is irrational.

Philosoft · 07-21-2002, 01:45 PM

<strong>Quoth Pseudo-vir

-I am completely ignorant of the beginning of the universe and/or what set the universe in motion.
-Therefore God does not, by any means, exist.</strong>

*sigh*

Show me an atheist who maintains this and I will grant your accusation of irrationality.

Philosoft · 07-21-2002, 01:50 PM

I'm going to bring this question up again since, 1) I never got an answer before and, 2) it seems relevant.

What is the practical difference between the "strong" atheist who says, "I believe God doesn't exist" and the "weak" atheist who says, "I don't believe in God" or "I lack belief in God"?

This seems to be a crucial distinction in much of the rhetoric surrounding rational/irrational discussions and I'd just like to know why some think it's such a monumental difference.

Titanpoint · 07-21-2002, 01:57 PM

Yes. Atheism can be done for irrational reasons as well as rational.

It could be argued that because one has not investigated the claims of every theistic religion, it is irrational to dismiss them without considering them.

I cannot say that my "conversion" to atheism was an entirely rational act, other than it was the culmination of a process by which I gave up hope of reconciling Xtianity with reality.

I have lots of reasons which to a theist would sound irrational.

Humans are not creatures of logic but creatures of pattern. The pattern does not have to conform to reality (and often doesn't) so long as it is reinforced in some way (like daily bible study, going to church etc). We are also social creatures and will often subsume our personal beliefs and doubts in order to be accepted by a group that we find comforting.

In that sense to be an atheist/freethinker/humanist is, in a certain sense, a rather defiant act and can be isolating. Not too many people can handle that.

My 2c

TP

07-21-2002, 02:06 PM

Pseudonym,

Quote:

How is lacking a belief in the existence and non-existence of God irrational? That is a kind Atheism: lack of belief in a God or Gods; not necessarily active denial. Please tell me how that specific form of Atheism is irrational.

The debate over "non-belief vs belief in non" can be very misleading. The distinction is very thin and is more useful to distinguish attitude than epistemic strength.

In short, both of those positions can be held within a largely irrational atheistic position, both can be held within a largely rational position.

Liquidrage · 07-21-2002, 02:28 PM

Depends on what is being denied.

I think it is irrational, in fact downright asinine, to believe that anything omnipotent and benevolent could exist.

"Is god willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god?"
-Epicurus

David Mathews · 07-21-2002, 03:11 PM

Hello Clutvh,

Quote:

There are billions of people around, so irrational everythings probably exist. But by the standards I've sketched, I expect that irrational atheism is very, very rare. By contrast, in my experience, irrational theism is virtually the only kind.

David: I do believe that your characterization of all theism as irrational would seem to be an assumption on your own part. Given that there are all these billions of theists it seems likely that even if only a small proportion are rational the number would still exceed the population of all atheists (rational and irrational).

However, I think it most important that you do acknowledge the potential existence of irrational atheists. I am certain that such atheists do exists and that they constitute a small percentage of the atheists at Internet Infidels.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews · 07-21-2002, 03:19 PM

Hello Everyone,

Atheists can accept atheism -- strong or weak, passive or active -- for irrational reasons. Atheists are fallible just like everyone else.

I don't suppose that these atheists invest a lot of their time intellectually investigation the concept of God, the different religions of the world, the philosophical evidences for and against God's existence or investigating the abilities and limitations of the human intellect & perceptions.

What amount of evidence & thought do you suppose is sufficient to trasform irrational atheism into rational atheism?

Sincerely,

David Mathews

optimist · 07-21-2002, 04:10 PM

David Mathews, I wouldn't expect the arguments required to turn an irrational atheism to a rational atheism be longer than a short book and a life filled with normal experiences. In normal life you meet plenty of theists who are so simply because of their parents/family/hope etc. The book would give a good number of arguments against theism, then talk about the psychological reasons religion survives today, than a person will compare the claims of religion to their own life. If theists they know fit those psychological profiles, and their life fails to be filled with miracles then they will have achieved at least a rational belief in atheism. Not the rock-solid belief many of us here have come to, but enough to be rational. No one should reach a absolutely certain belief, there is always room for new evidence.

Multiple sources would probably be required to help along credibility. With all the information coming from one book it would be hard to take at face value.
_________________________

Phil, as for weak vs. strong atheism... I don't think many (if any) "strong atheists" exist. It is an inherently irrational position because it claims to be completely certain about an empirical fact, the fact that there is no God. You can never be certain about an empirical fact, only logical facts. I, for one, do not even hold logical facts certain.

Weak atheism is what is meant when the word "atheism" or "atheist" is used normally.

I suspect strong atheism is just a straw man set-up so theists can knock it down and pretend they've proven their God.

Devilnaut · 07-21-2002, 05:26 PM

Strong Atheism is simply a label given to those who perceive the probability of a given God-concept to be below 50%. It has nothing to do with certainty.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-21-2002, 01:45 PM	#22
Philosoft Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Southeast of disorder Posts: 6,829	<strong>Quoth Pseudo-vir -I am completely ignorant of the beginning of the universe and/or what set the universe in motion. -Therefore God does not, by any means, exist.</strong> sigh Show me an atheist who maintains this and I will grant your accusation of irrationality.

07-21-2002, 01:50 PM	#23
Philosoft Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Southeast of disorder Posts: 6,829	I'm going to bring this question up again since, 1) I never got an answer before and, 2) it seems relevant. What is the practical difference between the "strong" atheist who says, "I believe God doesn't exist" and the "weak" atheist who says, "I don't believe in God" or "I lack belief in God"? This seems to be a crucial distinction in much of the rhetoric surrounding rational/irrational discussions and I'd just like to know why some think it's such a monumental difference.

07-21-2002, 01:57 PM	#24
Titanpoint Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Netherlands Posts: 130	Yes. Atheism can be done for irrational reasons as well as rational. It could be argued that because one has not investigated the claims of every theistic religion, it is irrational to dismiss them without considering them. I cannot say that my "conversion" to atheism was an entirely rational act, other than it was the culmination of a process by which I gave up hope of reconciling Xtianity with reality. I have lots of reasons which to a theist would sound irrational. Humans are not creatures of logic but creatures of pattern. The pattern does not have to conform to reality (and often doesn't) so long as it is reinforced in some way (like daily bible study, going to church etc). We are also social creatures and will often subsume our personal beliefs and doubts in order to be accepted by a group that we find comforting. In that sense to be an atheist/freethinker/humanist is, in a certain sense, a rather defiant act and can be isolating. Not too many people can handle that. My 2c TP

07-21-2002, 02:28 PM	#26
Liquidrage Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 1,301	Depends on what is being denied. I think it is irrational, in fact downright asinine, to believe that anything omnipotent and benevolent could exist. "Is god willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god?" -Epicurus

07-21-2002, 03:19 PM	#28
David Mathews Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: st. petersburg Posts: 622	Hello Everyone, Atheists can accept atheism -- strong or weak, passive or active -- for irrational reasons. Atheists are fallible just like everyone else. I don't suppose that these atheists invest a lot of their time intellectually investigation the concept of God, the different religions of the world, the philosophical evidences for and against God's existence or investigating the abilities and limitations of the human intellect & perceptions. What amount of evidence & thought do you suppose is sufficient to trasform irrational atheism into rational atheism? Sincerely, David Mathews

07-21-2002, 04:10 PM	#29
optimist Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Depending on the week: Miami, Dallas, or Seattle Posts: 101	David Mathews, I wouldn't expect the arguments required to turn an irrational atheism to a rational atheism be longer than a short book and a life filled with normal experiences. In normal life you meet plenty of theists who are so simply because of their parents/family/hope etc. The book would give a good number of arguments against theism, then talk about the psychological reasons religion survives today, than a person will compare the claims of religion to their own life. If theists they know fit those psychological profiles, and their life fails to be filled with miracles then they will have achieved at least a rational belief in atheism. Not the rock-solid belief many of us here have come to, but enough to be rational. No one should reach a absolutely certain belief, there is always room for new evidence. Multiple sources would probably be required to help along credibility. With all the information coming from one book it would be hard to take at face value. _________________________ Phil, as for weak vs. strong atheism... I don't think many (if any) "strong atheists" exist. It is an inherently irrational position because it claims to be completely certain about an empirical fact, the fact that there is no God. You can never be certain about an empirical fact, only logical facts. I, for one, do not even hold logical facts certain. Weak atheism is what is meant when the word "atheism" or "atheist" is used normally. I suspect strong atheism is just a straw man set-up so theists can knock it down and pretend they've proven their God.

07-21-2002, 05:26 PM	#30
Devilnaut Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Posts: 374	Strong Atheism is simply a label given to those who perceive the probability of a given God-concept to be below 50%. It has nothing to do with certainty.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.