Best argument for Atheism in my view

[comet]

I am not an atheist per se. But if i was this would be the best argument. I was watching FMA Brotherhood and i saw this scene. What i love about this is.. it uses the story of icarus. Essentially the moral of this is, religion when created is just gonna burn itself in the end so why even try? Even if you believe it is true. What i get from the flying close to the sun story. Its just brilliant and simple

Moderator Notice
Links removed due to 30/30 violation

I personally believe abrahamic ones were more made out of spite and not truth, since if you look at the history and values of it. I believe in God of obvious good and evil. A new religious cult i made. But i am curious to what you think?

There are no arguments for atheism.  It is simply a lack of belief in a god.  Provide sufficient evidence for a god and I will have no choice but to believe it.

I kind of doubt people when they say this.  I have always maintained that god is something but its just different what some religious people say it is.  Describe the universe and we are in effect describing the traits of their god.  it can't really be any other way.  Some of their traits lthey give god line up and some don't.  its that simple.

Most anti-theist will deny everything no matter what.  They actually act a bit like religious people in that its about "atheism" before how the universe works.

[Peebothuhlu]

No current reason(s) to believe in dieties exist for me.

Sure, that's the same thing. 

And since you're a thinking adult, who has heard and rejected the arguments, your rejection of the Christians' alleged reasons is a result of your thought processes.

Well... no.

I don't 'Reject' them.

I simply don't accept them. With the thoughts behind the 'Why' I don't accept them available.

The Christian ideas aren't alleged at all. Depending upon the beliefs of the faithful they're all 100%, bonafide, accounted for actual happenings.

That's great for them.

There's definetely a subtle difference in the way we're using our language Belaqua.

Cheers.

Not at work.

[Belacqua]

I don't 'Reject' them.

I simply don't accept them. With the thoughts behind the 'Why' I don't accept them available.

At the moment it's Monday, August 19, 7:57 AM where I am.

If I tell you that it's Thanksgiving in the US right now, do you reject this statement or merely not accept it?

[Peebothuhlu]

I don't 'Reject' them.

I simply don't accept them. With the thoughts behind the 'Why' I don't accept them available.

At the moment it's Monday, August 19, 7:57 AM where I am.

If I tell you that it's Thanksgiving in the US right now, do you reject this statement or merely not accept it?

Uhm... what day is that American holiday on again? Does it move aout the callendar?

I don't accept it untill I know more about it.

Edit: I mean... I know the Yank's celebrate their "Lets have a rebellion against the gov'mint!" affair with a day of remebering all the good bits, type of thing.

Exactly which day that is on the callendar I'm unsure of.
Or if it's the kind of thing that's a tad more general.
Such as "We'll have a picnic on the last Sunday of the ninth month of every year."
Since, y'know, that'd change every year.




Cheers.

Not at work.

[Mister Agenda]

It's like you won't accept it until you know more, and if you knew for a certainty that it's NOT August 19th, then you might reject it, am I right?

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

It's like you won't accept it until you know more, and if you knew for a certainty that it's NOT August 19th, then you might reject it, am I right?

Well..... if it's not the 19th then it's simply a wrong statement.
Or jokey/play on words cultural thing, maybe.

So.... another example.

The concept or ideas of 'Dragons'.
Hexapedal, winged/flying, weapon damage resistant, flame/plasma spewing critters?

We can discuss them. Describe them. Depict them. Sculpt them etc.

Are they real?
Obviously not at the moment in our immediate realty.
So, if they're not real and 'Just an idea'..... do we reject them/the idea because they're not real?

Cheers.

[Mister Agenda]

No, we reject the reality of them because they're not real.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

No, we reject the reality of them because they're not real.

That is a sentence that reads as wonky as fek in my mind.

[EgoDeath]

The best argument for being an atheist is that there is, so far, no evidence for any god(s). Though, there's much speculation about whether someone can choose to be an atheist or not. I suppose we probably cannot choose.

I don't remember making a choice to be an atheist so much as coming to the realization that I was an atheist. It was an uncovering of how I actually felt or "believed," not sitting down and checking a box or making a choice.

So, the best argument for being an atheist is that no real evidence for any gods has been presented yet. That's like saying, what's the best argument for holding the stance that you don't believe in vampires?

Well, before we even get to talking about why someone shouldn't believe in vampires, you actually gotta present some evidence for vampires first, so we can start a conversation.

The conversation about god or gods hasn't even started yet and theists fail to realize this.

[Vince]

There are no arguments for atheism.  It is simply a lack of belief in a god.  Provide sufficient evidence for a god and I will have no choice but to believe it.

I kind of doubt people when they say this.  I have always maintained that god is something but its just different what some religious people say it is.  Describe the universe and we are in effect describing the traits of their god.  it can't really be any other way.  Some of their traits lthey give god line up and some don't.  its that simple.

Most anti-theist will deny everything no matter what.  They actually act a bit like religious people in that its about "atheism" before how the universe works.

We do not get to choose our beliefs.  I cannot choose to believe the moon is made of cheese because I have overwhelming evidence that it is not.  If you provide me with sufficient evidence to believe then I will have to believe.

---

There are no arguments for atheism.  It is simply a lack of belief in a god.  Provide sufficient evidence for a god and I will have no choice but to believe it.

Have you discussed reasons for belief with Christians before? I suspect that, as a grownup who uses the Internet, you have heard any number of arguments Christians make for why (they think) God exists. 

And since you're an atheist, it seems that you have rejected all their arguments.

Yes.  

To do that, I'm pretty sure you'd need reasons why you rejected their arguments. That is, you considered what they said, and decided it wasn't persuasive. 

Now, if you wanted to argue that you dismissed their arguments on a whim, for no reason at all, then I'd agree that there are no arguments for atheism. But I hope you don't do that. I suspect that in fact you have good reasons why you reject their arguments.

Those are not reasons for atheism.  They are reasons to reject that specific claim about a god.  

So let's take a typical case. We've all heard the First Cause argument. Something like: "Every contingent thing depends for its existence on something else. To avoid infinite regress, we must assume that there is a non-contingent thing as first cause. This is what we call God." 

Please note: I am NOT saying that this is a good argument. I am NOT saying that you SHOULD accept it. I have NO interest in discussing the details of this argument. I am ONLY giving it as an example of something you have probably heard, and rejected. 

Now, there are any number of reasons for rejecting this First Cause argument. Perhaps you think that an infinite regress IS possible. Perhaps you think there may be a non-contingent cause, but it needn't be God. Perhaps you question whether every contingent thing really does depend on something else for its existence. These are all possible reasons -- but they are all REASONS. In other words, you reject the argument because you hold certain things to be true, or at least possible. You hear, consider, and reject the argument based on what you think about the world.

Yes and my response would be reasons to reject this particular argument for the existence of god.  Not reasons to be an atheist.  God could exist and there may be a convincing argument for a god but I have not heard of one yet and this particular argument is not convincing based on some reasons.

So I think that for any thinking person -- grownup, not in a vegetative state, who has considered the problem at all -- their current atheism is based on things they hold to be true. It is NOT based on nothing.

My atheism is not based on what I know is true but on the lack of sufficient evidence anyone has ever provided. 

Our current atheism may be based on very good reasons (e.g. revelation is unreliable as a source of truth) or on bad reasons (e.g. that lady at church was mean to me therefore Christianity is false) but it is based on reasons. And these reasons are things we hold to be true. Not nothing.

Simply put I do not believe in a god because no one has ever convinced me that one does exist.  I am making no claim as to whether god exists or not.  My only claim is that I am not aware of sufficient evidence for me to believe a god exists. If you call these reasons then ok, I don't consider them reasons for atheism. I am not making an argument for atheism, I am just not convinced and by default am an atheist.