Argument against atheism

[Perhaps]

Hehehe, I have an "argument against atheism".

It isn't an argument of technicality, or an argument for the existence or non-existence of gods at all. Let's see if you guys can help me whittle down my thoughts into a compact sound byte that describes the sort duality in my perceptions that lead me to being a myth loving but militant anti-theist.

As has been mentioned by many posters, atheism is not a worldview, it has no value or merit in and of itself extended beyond a lack of belief in gods. I do feel that the notion or concept of a god could be extremely useful as a focal point for positive beliefs, regardless of the veracity of the claims (and even with full knowledge of their factual inaccuracy). I do feel that there are many things in the natural world that can very easily be leveraged to form a workable worldview, and that the addition of mystery, magic, or the numinous even if it's approached only as a metaphor can re-enforce those positive beliefs, that workable worldview. The stumbling stone thusfar has not been belief itself, but the god's that we have manufactured as a focal point for those beliefs. It's not beyond possibility that we may be able to do better. Especially if we retain the approach under the stairs, and behind the curtains, that we are intentionally constructing a myth so as to be useful, not contradictory with reality in our interpretations, and open to revision and change. In short, constructing a useful myth out of truth that is not to be taken dogmatically, but instead as a means of communicating complicated ideas in ways which have been shown to be appealing to us (through the example of types of religions and types of gods that have enjoyed wide support throughout time). If we want to use the god concept, lets own it, lets improve upon it, lets not fall prey to repeating our history surrounding the concept. I wouldn't argue that it's something that we need, or something that we should do. I do believe that it's something that would enhance some of our lives, that it's something that we could do.

As an example; The notion of the connectedness of life has a great vehicle in the concept of energy binding us all, flowing through us all, and ultimately being shared by us all. If all of the superstition and baggage that comes along with the notion of "shared energy, shared life force" could be removed and re-tasked as a poetic description of a thing worthy of worship and reverence, imagine the possibilities. A life affirming faith, for a change. Not just our own but all life, as the source and spring of our own. This sort of definition of the divine could be useful in my opinion, as long as we do not insist upon taking it literally and creating a sort of authority out of it. If we understand these manufactured gods as concepts that we as a species have found useful in describing this or that feeling. That familiar sense of awe when considering something greater than ourselves. I've heard it said that god can be shorthand for truth, well, let's make it so rather than attempting to shoehorn truth into a preconceived notion of a god. I read a great book about the sort of religion that I would definitely be behind, called A Religion of Nature. One of the authors described how every benefit of religion that can be conceived of can be drawn from the observable world (and argued that this is probably exactly what we did in the first place). That religion and gods could be religious without being dogamtic, could be faithful to a god without insisting that the god actually existed.

Obviously this isn't really an argument for any specific god, or any specific faith, but a practical set of beliefs that could very easily be described as a religion. The acknowledgement of the usefulness of concepts which could be very easily be described as "gods". Take the good, leave the bad, be honest about what we've done, and leave it open for improvement. Now, one might argue that this religion would still be atheism, that these would be atheist's gods. I suppose that this is true. But I do feel that there might be a way to retain the magic that these sorts of narratives can have (and that many of us remember from our childhoods) without literally believing in magic. To that effect a religion with these sorts of gods as the focal point may be more useful than a worldview which has no such focal point. This isn't to say that atheists don't find the "divine" in other ways, other areas, simply that we know that mythical and legendary narratives are effective, and we might be able to leverage them in a way that is both honest, practical, and filled with faith and reverence for concepts which would do a great service to us and our continued existence here. You might be able to draw from this little rant that I have a great respect for what we attempted to do with religion and gods (in my optimists view of it all). Similarly it's pretty easy to see why I'm so disappointed with what we actually did with these concepts. I wish we had done a better job, and I think that we probably could do a better job if we were so inclined, and that this sort of exercise could be very useful for us.

(Looking back at this post it's no wonder to me that we spoke before we wrote. So much easier to let it roll off the tongue than write it down)

Very interesting ideas. I would say your second paragraph describes the views of pantheism - a single energy running through us all - unity - oneness - the perception of awe and wonder at the things we consider greater than ourselves.