Why do Athiests require 'proof' that God exists?

[JesusLover]

There are some things we cannot prove.

For example one cannot prove ones own existence - I could argue that you are a figment of my imagination, like a person in a dream. You would be unable to prove that you were a self aware, autonomous human being.

Using atheist logic I should therefore consider all other humans to not be self aware, sentient, concious beings as they cannot 'prove' they have these qualities.

Would it not be better to accept that I can never know if other people are self aware like me? That I can never know if God exists or not?

[Tobie]

We require proof of existence because positive claims have to be proved. If there is no evidence for something, it is irrelevant and should be assumed false. For example, in Physics, nothing is assumed true, or fact, it is described as a "model" or a "theory".

I may not be able to prove my own existence, but my existence is ultimately irrelevant.

[Paul the Human]

Atheism simply means to lack belief that god(s) exist. The reason that atheists require proof is that we do not believe that your god exists, so we ask that you prove your claim. I don't even go that far myself. I simply ask for a single compelling and convincing reason to believe that your claims that a god exists are true. One reason that does not presuppose that one does.

[genkaus]

There are some things we cannot prove.

For example one cannot prove ones own existence - I could argue that you are a figment of my imagination, like a person in a dream. You would be unable to prove that you were a self aware, autonomous human being.

Using atheist logic I should therefore consider all other humans to not be self aware, sentient, concious beings as they cannot 'prove' they have these qualities.

Would it not be better to accept that I can never know if other people are self aware like me? That I can never know if God exists or not?

Ofcourse we can prove that. Come over here and I'll slap you upside on the head. I'm willing to give this proof to you as many times and for as long as it takes to convince you.

[Anomalocaris]

Why do you not believe in my bullshit? Why do you doubt my bullshit? Just believe it. Afterall, just because it is bullshit doesn't mean it can't be true, and besides, how do you prove beyond all unreasonable doubt something is true anyway. Nothing can be proven beyond unreasonable. So everything is unproven. You believe something that is not proven beyond unreasonable doubt, so why not believe my bullshit as well? Just believe my bullshit!

[Darwinian]

Would it not be better to accept that I can never know if other people are self aware like me? That I can never know if God exists or not?

I do accept that I can never know if God exists or not, just as I employ the same principles with the tooth fairy, Odin, Zeus, Ghosts etc. etc. It's just that I find the complete and utter lack of any evidence, credibility and verisimilitude overwhelming.

Oh, and which God are you talking about? All of them or just the one that your where indoctrinated into believing because of the geographical location of your birth and the views of those around you?

[Sciwoman]

We don't ask for proof. Proofs are for math. We ask for evidence.

[Kayenneh]

If you have the time, please take a look through this video, and then you might understand the concept of burden of proof.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY

We can prove that we are the same, by instance by taking samples of DNA or by looking at MRIs and clearly seeing that there is brain activity and self awareness, thus proving that we are made of the same building blocks, and that we indeed are sentient and conscious. And René Descartes' philosophies aren't worth much..

[FallentoReason]

For example one cannot prove ones own existence - I could argue that you are a figment of my imagination, like a person in a dream. You would be unable to prove that you were a self aware, autonomous human being.

The French philosopher Descartes came to the conclusion that the very fact that one can ask oneself 'do I exist' shows that one does in fact exist. Otherwise it would be an impossibility to even undergo the task of asking oneself.

Using atheist logic I should therefore consider all other humans to not be self aware, sentient, concious beings as they cannot 'prove' they have these qualities.

I'm not sure what 'atheist logic' is as you can't box them into one category of beliefs. The only thing they have in common is the lack of belief in a deity, that is all.

Either way, I think it's reasonable to be able to corrolate the actions of others with their self awareness, as I have observed with myself.

Would it not be better to accept that I can never know if other people are self aware like me? That I can never know if God exists or not?

I agree to an extent that you can't show 100% but I mean we're talking a very thin philosophical line here. In practice I observe that others have the same functionality as me and I'm aware of my existence, so therefore I'm inclined to believe they do too.

As for God, I personally believe that such a being hasn't presented itself to us. Whether it exists or not, I haven't really given it much thought lately.

[Shell B]

Why wouldn't I?

I can prove I exist. It's simple, really, if you're not complicating with the hope that my existence is as intangible as that of god.