Belief and Knowledge

[Jenny A]

First, a little background on what inspired this thread. In another thread, Surgenator claimed that atheists do no believe in things which have not been proven to be true.

Correction, by definition atheists share only one thing in common, a lack of belief in god. Atheists may believe in a number of things which are not true before breakfast: their spouse is/isn't faithful; they will have a job by nightfall; blank candidate is the best choice; UFO's have landed; and who knows what else. Atheism isn't skepticism though most skeptics are atheists and many atheists are skeptics. Nor do all skeptics manage to apply skepticism at all times.

I challenged him on that claiming that atheists believe in abiogenesis(which is an un-falsifiable hypothesis not proven to be true). Others jumped in claiming atheist have no such beliefs...they just don't know. Anyways, that prompted me to make a poll at another atheist forum....too gauge what atheists really believe. You can find that poll here

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...rse?page=1

Currently after 37 votes, more than 50% of atheists believe the unproven and un-falsifiable hypothesis that life in this universe arose via some natural process and not from design.

You see, we don't necessarily share beliefs about anything but god.

One poster wanted to vote for 2 options. The "I don't know" and the "Via some natural process". I thought about this position and concluded it wasn't contradictory. He was confused. Was the poll asking belief or knowledge? The poll didn't specify. Although he didn't express it, this poster is savy enough to realize there is a difference between belief and knowledge.

When an atheists(or anyone for that matter) says, "I don't know" he isn't saying anything about his beliefs....he is saying something about his knowledge.

The crux of it is that knowledge requires rational proof. Belief can be just an opinion held with or without, or even in the face of the evidence. Belief can also be an opinion rationally based on what is most likely. It is possible to hold a belief while knowing that it is only the most likely outcome, not the only possibility, and therefore subject to change should new evidence present itself. That would be a rationally held belief.

I personally believe that there is no god who has any personal interest in the doings of humans. That is a rationally held belief subject to change in the unlikely event any evidence the contrary turns up. I lack a belief one way or the other about most other gods described. But I maintain that any claim of knowledge of god is really merely a belief held with insufficient evidence.

If you want to talk about whether life arose from some natural process, I'm happy to do so. I think it did. That is a rationally held belief. All things appear to have a natural cause. Therefore, it is most likely that life has a natural cause.