The Case for Atheism

[Esquilax]

And just because an atheist claims to have debunked my arguments doesn't make them false.

No, but the information in those debunkings proves your arguments flawed. The same debunkings that you've ignored. And just continued asserting that what you're saying is true. Which has an interesting subtext.

So to you atheism means I don't know?

It means I don't believe current god claims until they're properly shouldered their burden of proof. So, in a way, yes; it means I'm intellectually honest enough to accept that I don't have the answers to every question, and that doesn't give me the right to just make up something that seems comfortable.

So if I ask:

Do you think God created the universe? Your answer is I don't know.

Generally speaking, yes.

Do you think God created life? Your answer is I don't know.

Also yes. Nobody has the answer to the question of abiogenesis, so why would I be justified in assuming a god did it?

Do you think natural forces without plan or intent caused life to exist? Your answer is I don't know.

Now you're getting it. I will say, though, that so far those natural explanations have the edge of at least being immediately demonstrable.

Do you have any opinion about whether God exists or not? Your answer is I don't know.

Yes! Of course I don't know! And as much as you claim to, you don't either! None of us do, because if you can't show it, you don't know it! You believe that a god exists, you have formulated sufficient evidence for you to justify your own beliefs. That's not the same as knowledge, because knowledge is by definition something that can be demonstrated to be true. All I'm doing, is I'm not pretending that I know the answer to questions that we can't possibly come close to answering yet!

Does that mean all claims are created equal? No, because there is certainly evidence that points one way or the other; frankly, I tend to follow the scientific consensus because those fuckers are smart and have dedicated their lives to erecting a self correcting, honest, and always improving system. But science makes no claims regarding a god as of yet; why should I?

On what grounds do you call yourself an atheist if all it means is I don't know? Why not just call yourself undecided or unsure?

Because at the same time as I don't know, I also don't think that religious claims have made any strides toward fulfilling their burden of proof. Like I said, atheism is a position on gods and not creators; there could very well be a creative being that made the universe, but if you want to do what religious people do, and assign that being a shape and a voice and a rulebook of what and what not to do, then you've made a claim and I'll expect you to back it up, and if I don't find the evidence compelling, then I will not believe. I'm open to the prospect of a creator, but I do not believe in any religion's claims to knowledge about who that being might be, and am thus an atheist.

Atheism not adeism.