Mailbag: Atheism Not Valid?
Subject: Question: Why do people choose to be atheists?
If you cannot refute a person's arguments for theism then how is it that you can now become an "atheist"? I thought you had to go through study and research in order to become an "atheist". Or is it that if you just don't want to follow moral principles anymore or you don't want to follow a God anymore then it is reasonable to turn to "atheism"?
I've rarely seen nonsensical misunderstandings about atheism quite as extreme as Richard exhibited over a serious of increasingly incoherent emails. Granted, many if not most of the people you encounter on the internet who describe themselves as "atheists" have probably studied some religion and can counter some arguments commonly offered to defend theism... but since when has there been a course of "study and research" that a person must pass in order to acquire the "atheist" label?
An atheist is simply someone who disbelieves in gods - it has nothing to do with what a person has studied, how good they are at theological arguments, or anything else. A person who believes in at least one god is a theist. Everyone else is an atheist - that's all there is to it. I'm not quite sure why people keep trying to attach more significance to the label than that.
The idea that atheists simply don't want to follow any moral principles anymore is also common - closely associated is the idea that people refuse to accept divine rule and this is why they are atheists. Of course, a person angry at a god isn't an atheist, they're an angry theist.
Why would it "be good" to "establish that not believing is itself reasonable"? If you cannot establish that being an "atheist" is reasonable in the first place, you have no validation for rejecting that there is a God. You should rather discover why it is that you want to rebel.
It is good to establish that doubt is reasonable because otherwise people would never question what they are told. Being an atheist is reasonable because theists have not made a strong enough case for the claim that some god exists. Yes, they have a variety of arguments, but by and large they are rather weak and do not do a good enough job at supporting their conclusions.
Doubting is in itself valid for things that are not known but everyone knows there is a God so there is no excuse for saying that you doubt the existence of God. I could understand that if you had valid reasons for rejecting that there is a God and you just didn't have the time at that point to go into them. Yet, there are no valid reasons. You are assuming that there are because you want that to be the case.
This is a favorite stand-by of arrogant theists: instead of accepting the burden of having to actually make an argument for the existence of their god, they deny that there is any need to do so. Why? Well, because everyone already knows that this god exists - they are just in denial. The theist doesn't have to prove the existence of something that everyone already agrees on; now, the theist's task is to explain how and why the atheist has gone so wrong. What follows are any number of ad hominem arguments, for example that the opinions expressed by the atheist can be discounted because they come from a person who is in denial and won't even admit that they really believe in God.
More selections from the Agnosticism / Atheism Mailbag...
Comments
This person appears to operate under the mistaken impression that theism is the “default” position. (My words.) Something to be “rejected” or “rebelled against” (His words, more or less.)
Obviously this could not be further from the truth. Atheism is the default position. No child is born a theist. Theists have felt the need throughout history to “bring God” to remote civilizations.
Basically, one would never be a theist (Christian or otherwise) unless they were told/taught to be so.
Therefore, atheism is the default position.
Paul is exactly right. No child is born a theist. It has to be taught, just like being taught 1+1=2 and the world is round (not flat, even though *everyone* believed it was flat many centuries ago).
I often wonder why anyone would *not* be an atheist!
Richard understands nothing of argument, logic, or basic definitions of the subject matter. His inability to communicate coherent thought suggests that his comprehension of any attempt to refute him is nonexistent. I’m actually amazed that Austin would have spent any time on this ignoramus.
I think I know that guy.
There is the other ignoramus named “Kansas City Anti-Atheists” who posted comments in the “Promoting Life Without Religion is Disrespectful & Intolerant” claiming that “atheist governments” have killed millions of Christians due to people like Stalin and Mao being atheist were anti-religious zealots. That person offered no support in regards what an “atheist government” actually is or how being an atheist causes them to kill others. Meaning he/she doesn’t even have a clue that an atheist is a person who lacks belief in god(s); atheism isn’t a religion, ideology, political, social movement.
“everyone knows there is a God”.
Argumentum ad populem.
Moving on…
Getting to Richard’s initial question, if he’ll allow us the courtesy of speaking for ourselves…
I did not choose to be an atheist.
Instead, i was mortified to discover that Christianity, what i was taught from childhood, is a fairy tale. Contrary to what Richard likes to believe, my departure from Christianity was a months-long struggle against accepting what should have been obvious to me for years: that all the arguments for God’s existence are based on ignorance, confirmation bias, or excuses for why God never shows up when you need Him. (I still haven’t figured out why i believed that a dead man came back to life in the first place.)
Stephen,
Lose a limb and then we’ll see if your god is there for you.
http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/
You only assume I haven’t already lost a limb and that my God wasn’t there for me. In fact I have lost more than a limb and my God was still there and still is here, and He will never leave me nor forsake me.
But he would never return to you a lost limb.