Best argument for Atheism in my view

[Vince]

There are no arguments for atheism.  It is simply a lack of belief in a god.  Provide sufficient evidence for a god and I will have no choice but to believe it.

I kind of doubt people when they say this.  I have always maintained that god is something but its just different what some religious people say it is.  Describe the universe and we are in effect describing the traits of their god.  it can't really be any other way.  Some of their traits lthey give god line up and some don't.  its that simple.

Most anti-theist will deny everything no matter what.  They actually act a bit like religious people in that its about "atheism" before how the universe works.

We do not get to choose our beliefs.  I cannot choose to believe the moon is made of cheese because I have overwhelming evidence that it is not.  If you provide me with sufficient evidence to believe then I will have to believe.

---

There are no arguments for atheism.  It is simply a lack of belief in a god.  Provide sufficient evidence for a god and I will have no choice but to believe it.

Have you discussed reasons for belief with Christians before? I suspect that, as a grownup who uses the Internet, you have heard any number of arguments Christians make for why (they think) God exists. 

And since you're an atheist, it seems that you have rejected all their arguments.

Yes.  

To do that, I'm pretty sure you'd need reasons why you rejected their arguments. That is, you considered what they said, and decided it wasn't persuasive. 

Now, if you wanted to argue that you dismissed their arguments on a whim, for no reason at all, then I'd agree that there are no arguments for atheism. But I hope you don't do that. I suspect that in fact you have good reasons why you reject their arguments.

Those are not reasons for atheism.  They are reasons to reject that specific claim about a god.  

So let's take a typical case. We've all heard the First Cause argument. Something like: "Every contingent thing depends for its existence on something else. To avoid infinite regress, we must assume that there is a non-contingent thing as first cause. This is what we call God." 

Please note: I am NOT saying that this is a good argument. I am NOT saying that you SHOULD accept it. I have NO interest in discussing the details of this argument. I am ONLY giving it as an example of something you have probably heard, and rejected. 

Now, there are any number of reasons for rejecting this First Cause argument. Perhaps you think that an infinite regress IS possible. Perhaps you think there may be a non-contingent cause, but it needn't be God. Perhaps you question whether every contingent thing really does depend on something else for its existence. These are all possible reasons -- but they are all REASONS. In other words, you reject the argument because you hold certain things to be true, or at least possible. You hear, consider, and reject the argument based on what you think about the world.

Yes and my response would be reasons to reject this particular argument for the existence of god.  Not reasons to be an atheist.  God could exist and there may be a convincing argument for a god but I have not heard of one yet and this particular argument is not convincing based on some reasons.

So I think that for any thinking person -- grownup, not in a vegetative state, who has considered the problem at all -- their current atheism is based on things they hold to be true. It is NOT based on nothing.

My atheism is not based on what I know is true but on the lack of sufficient evidence anyone has ever provided. 

Our current atheism may be based on very good reasons (e.g. revelation is unreliable as a source of truth) or on bad reasons (e.g. that lady at church was mean to me therefore Christianity is false) but it is based on reasons. And these reasons are things we hold to be true. Not nothing.

Simply put I do not believe in a god because no one has ever convinced me that one does exist.  I am making no claim as to whether god exists or not.  My only claim is that I am not aware of sufficient evidence for me to believe a god exists. If you call these reasons then ok, I don't consider them reasons for atheism. I am not making an argument for atheism, I am just not convinced and by default am an atheist.