Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Atheism: some more thoughts about it

A friend posted something about how atheism is not a religion. And he's right. It's not. But I immediately thought about how certain levels of atheism can require a level of faith similar to that required by believing what a religion teaches. You can read all about atheism and its meanings on the wiki page. It's a really good read.

I consider myself an "explicit weak atheist" according to the article, and also an agnostic (which is very similar to a "weak atheist" anyway). Just wanted to be clear.

So I said in the first paragraph that certain levels of atheism require faith like religions do. According to the wiki article, this level I'm thinking of would be "strong atheism". It is the specific belief that there is no god or set of gods. This type of atheism requires faith though, because no one can prove that a god or set of gods does not exist. It simply can't be done. Just because we can't perceive something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Of course, on the other hand, it can never be proven that a god or gods does exist either. Even if a powerful being appeared before you, walked on water, transmuted water to wine, brought a dead animal back to life, cured a person of terminal cancer, teleported right in front of you, and/or conceived a human child without touching the woman... it still wouldn't prove the existence of a god or gods. It would just show you that really powerful beings can exist. Or maybe just a REALLY technologically advanced one. Doesn't matter what the explanation is... it's still not proof of a god or set of gods.

What I'm trying to get to I think is that I don't understand how anyone can be anything but a "weak atheist". No event in my life or any event I've ever heard of has even remotely suggested the existence of a god. Sure, I've heard religious folks speak and say there is a god. But what do they know? They don't know anything. They only believe. They have faith. But that faith is based on absolutely nothing. Some coincidence in their life that seemed too good to be true, or too unlikely to have happened without "divine intervention" is still not even evidence of a god, let alone proof. Surviving a crash that should have killed you is not proof of a god. It's a coincidence. Things just happened that way because that's how physics works. The circumstances were such that you survived. That's all.

It's nearly 1 AM, and I'm swiftly losing my focus. I think I just wanted to write about how religious people are wrong, and about how even some atheists are wrong.

If you think I'm wrong... prove that there's a god. Or prove that there isn't one. I'd be mighty impressed either way. In the meantime, I'm going to go on with my lack of belief in any god or set of gods, because I haven't seen anything to suggest their existence. There's no reason to waste time on them.

No comments: