Is there an argument For atheism

[luckyme]

We are born atheists, a-gravityists, a-flamehotists. Evidence and argument may move us off that stance as each topic arises.

"do you believe the flame is hot sonny?"
"no." he's an a-flamehotist.
Touches flame. " ok, now I believe it is hot".

It seems bizzaro that the natural and default stance is somehow seen as a belief in a negation of a pro-belief.

NR mentioned in another thread, "..atheism is presumptively true". 'true' doesn't apply to a-flamehotism. Not believing the flame is hot doesn't mean he thinks it's 'true' the flame is not hot.

A-Xism is "you have not proven your case" therefore I do not believe X. It says nothing about not-X.

Wouldn't any 'argument for atheism' mean proving the non-existence of a supernatural entity? There is zero evidence for the existence of such an entity but that's only why I remain an atheist, I can't prove it isn't there moving the atoms around for us.

???

luckyme

[PairTheBoard]

I think what you're describing is agnosticism. "I don't know therefore I can't believe one way or the other". The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I think what you're describing is agnosticism. "I don't know therefore I can't believe one way or the other". The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not the popular meaning of atheism on this board.

chez

[Prodigy54321]

[ QUOTE ]
The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

you are describing "strong atheism"...I'm sure that most atheists on this board take the "weak atheist" position...weak atheism is typically the position that we see no sufficient evidence to warrant belief in a god or gods.

this position may be technically agnostic..but pretty much all reasonable positions are technically agnostic..absolute certainlty is pretty unreasonable.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

you are describing "strong atheism"...I'm sure that most atheists on this board take the "weak atheist" position...weak atheism is typically the position that we see no sufficient evidence to warrant belief in a god or gods.

this position may be technically agnostic..but pretty much all reasonable positions are technically agnostic..absolute certainlty is pretty unreasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I am unreasonable because I am a 'strong atheist'. However, are you saying anyone who absolutely believes in God is unreasonable as well?

[HighStakesPro]

in Aquinas' view, in order to belief in God you have to have faith, which is pretty much the opposite of reason, so yes I would say that belief in God is a position of faith and not a a reasonable position.

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
in Aquinas' view, in order to belief in God you have to have faith, which is pretty much the opposite of reason, so yes I would say that belief in God is a position of faith and not a a reasonable position.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure nobody defends belief in God as a reasonable position. And rightfully so, as they should devote all their apologetic time to arguing that it's so much as a meaningful position.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]


you are describing "strong atheism"...I'm sure that most atheists on this board take the "weak atheist" position...weak atheism is typically the position that we see no sufficient evidence to warrant belief in a god or gods.

this position may be technically agnostic..but pretty much all reasonable positions are technically agnostic..absolute certainlty is pretty unreasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he was right. You are describing an agnostic, plain and simple.

[SammyKid11]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]


you are describing "strong atheism"...I'm sure that most atheists on this board take the "weak atheist" position...weak atheism is typically the position that we see no sufficient evidence to warrant belief in a god or gods.

this position may be technically agnostic..but pretty much all reasonable positions are technically agnostic..absolute certainlty is pretty unreasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he was right. You are describing an agnostic, plain and simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he's not. Let me break it down.

Strong Atheist - I definitely believe there is no god.
Weak Atheist - I definitely do not believe there is a god.

You see the difference here, right? One is making a positive statement that there is no god, while the other is merely indicating an absence of positive belief that god exists.

As for agnosticism...it isn't about belief, it's about knowledge. The...

-WEAK AGNOSTIC says that, given the evidence and capabilities currently available to them, it is not knowable whether or not any gods exist.
-STRONG AGNOSTIC says that truth or falsehood about the existence of gods is permanently unknowable to finite beings (and they don't grant one way or another whether un-finite beings exist).

These are all different positions...and certainly some of them can overlap. But I believe this is how you'll see these terms being discussed here and in other similar forums. Some people feel "strong" and "weak" are pejorative terms and will employ different words to mark the distinctions between one type of agnosticism, one type of atheism, etc. But you get the idea.

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The athiest says, "I definitely believe there is no God".

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]


you are describing "strong atheism"...I'm sure that most atheists on this board take the "weak atheist" position...weak atheism is typically the position that we see no sufficient evidence to warrant belief in a god or gods.

this position may be technically agnostic..but pretty much all reasonable positions are technically agnostic..absolute certainlty is pretty unreasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he was right. You are describing an agnostic, plain and simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he's not. Let me break it down.

Strong Atheist - I definitely believe there is no god.
Weak Atheist - I definitely do not believe there is a god.

You see the difference here, right? One is making a positive statement that there is no god, while the other is merely indicating an absence of positive belief that god exists.

As for agnosticism...it isn't about belief, it's about knowledge. The...

-WEAK AGNOSTIC says that, given the evidence and capabilities currently available to them, it is not knowable whether or not any gods exist.
-STRONG AGNOSTIC says that truth or falsehood about the existence of gods is permanently unknowable to finite beings (and they don't grant one way or another whether un-finite beings exist).

These are all different positions...and certainly some of them can overlap. But I believe this is how you'll see these terms being discussed here and in other similar forums. Some people feel "strong" and "weak" are pejorative terms and will employ different words to mark the distinctions between one type of agnosticism, one type of atheism, etc. But you get the idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

So it looks to me that the agnostic doesn not make a statement about "belief" while the weak atheist does. Weak atheism therefore takes a position non only on God, but on the concept of "belief". The agnostic takes no position on what it might mean to "believe" or where he stands on that issue.

How's that?

PairTheBoard