Atheist struggling to answer a question i often propose to myself

[Magilla]

i'm wondering if you can help me im an atheist but am struggling to answer a question i often propose to myself it goes something like this.....

If you see an ant crawling across the ground, to the ant, you are his god that could wipe him out at time, he has no intelligence of you or that you exist, for the ant he is as intelligent as he is going to get, and can't even comprehend we exist.

So could we be in the same position as the ant? as far as we can see humans right now are as intelligent as we can get, but growing up we do not have the intelligence capacity to comprehend our surrounding. As children, take a 1 year old or any age under 3-4 we are also at that point, (The same as the ant) as intelligent at THAT time as we are going to get and cannot comprehend to world around us intelligently.

So just the same as the ant, adults at our height point of intelligence, to the toddler we are the Gods. What if we, right NOW are at this point in time, at our current level of intelligence are in the same position as the Ant and Toddler? Could there be an unknown Force, Entity, that just the same as we are unknown to the ant and the toddler to his or her world, that is looking at us as we look at the ant?

As its happening right now to the ant and toddler, this is proof it can, and is happening, It doesn't seem that extraordinary somthing is looknig at us in the same way,

Would love to hear what you think,

Thanks

The ant ~ "Human-God" analogy is a bit weak, as some other posters have noted. We don't know how ants perceive us and the world. Someone has already said that ants can have physical contact with you, and bite you etc. It is likely that they can see you, (albeit as a giant 'something').

Many gods have been proposed and worshipped over the millennia. If you happened to be a Christian, or a Muslim, or a religious Jew, you would reject all but one of those gods as being fictitious. You'd only accept your own god, and probably only your own version, of the generic version, of your preferred god. The question is: "HOW can the monotheistic religious person reject the other gods?" When asked, I find that their response tends to be something like: "Because there is no evidence for them"; (ironic !!!)

As an agnostic atheist, a good question to ask oneself, is: "Do I want to be an intellectually honest, truth-seeking individual?" I would hope that everyone would answer 'YES' to that question.

Now unlike the ants, I have no convincing evidence that any gods exist. The intellectually honest, truth-seeking response ought to be IMHO, that one ought not to accept as true, that which is lacking in any kind of convincing evidence. So if you find no convincing evidence for the existence of any gods, then one ought NOT to accept such propositions as TRUE. This is NOT the same as finding that the propositions are FALSE.

Speaking for me, I count myself as an agnostic atheist. I'm atheist, because I believe in no gods, whilst not going so far as saying that I know to a certainty that no gods exist. This lack of absolute certainty exists because I can't prove the universal, that there are no gods whatsoever. Thus the agnostic part of my self classification. This means that if in the future I find some convincing evidence for the existence of a god, then I'd change my position.

Note that atheism is a state of belief, (or more accurately, a lack of belief). Agnosticism is about knowledge, (knowledge being a true accurate understanding of ontology; ie. of reality).

If I were a wise ant that could think, I would stick to what I had good convincing evidence for, and not go inventing epistomologies, (which seems like a contradiction anyway). I would be like humans are, with some knowledge based on convincing evidence, analysis and testing, plus some propositions without convincing evidence, on which I'd be agnostic.

As for myself, on the "God" question, there are many things which are proposed by theology, about "God", which make no sense to me, and some are contradictory or incoherent, IMHO. I put those those in the b*llsh*t basket, and think to myself that those B.S. propositions are really signs of the absence of any better, more convincing evidence for the existence "God".