Why Atheism is Incoherent & You Aren't as Smart as You Think You Are

[brewer]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Consideration of purpose, meaning and direction means little without context.

Believe you that nature is deterministic? If so, then surely most everything outside the control of organisms with advanced brains & free will has been fated, no? Even these things are deterministic, because whether an organism survives and passes on its thought patterns depends on how much those thought patterns align with its environment and give it a survival and reproductive advantage. I want to be very, very clear that I am not trying to invoke the God of the gaps, or 'haha there is a gap in empirical knowledge here, atheists BTFO' or any such silliness. I am talking about the ultimate consequences of natural laws, by which I mean the direction in which they cause the universe to move towards.

So your position is that nature is deterministic in the context of life forms/living things?

You still have not identified a source of "will". So far all you've presented is supposition.

---

Obvious troll is obvious.

Don't break this one, not quite yet.

[arewethereyet]

Believe you that nature is deterministic? If so, then surely most everything outside the control of organisms with advanced brains & free will has been fated, no? Even these things are deterministic, because whether an organism survives and passes on its thought patterns depends on how much those thought patterns align with its environment and give it a survival and reproductive advantage. I want to be very, very clear that I am not trying to invoke the God of the gaps, or 'haha there is a gap in empirical knowledge here, atheists BTFO' or any such silliness. I am talking about the ultimate consequences of natural laws, by which I mean the direction in which they cause the universe to move towards.

So your position is that nature is deterministic in the context of life forms/living things?

You still have not identified a source of "will". So far all you've presented is supposition.

---

Obvious troll is obvious.

Don't break this one, not quite yet.

You can have him, for now.

Carry on.

[Seax]

Believe you that nature is deterministic? If so, then surely most everything outside the control of organisms with advanced brains & free will has been fated, no? Even these things are deterministic, because whether an organism survives and passes on its thought patterns depends on how much those thought patterns align with its environment and give it a survival and reproductive advantage. I want to be very, very clear that I am not trying to invoke the God of the gaps, or 'haha there is a gap in empirical knowledge here, atheists BTFO' or any such silliness. I am talking about the ultimate consequences of natural laws, by which I mean the direction in which they cause the universe to move towards.

So your position is that nature is deterministic in the context of life forms/living things?

You still have not identified a source of "will". So far all you've presented is supposition.

---

Obvious troll is obvious.

Don't break this one, not quite yet.

No, nature is deterministic overall. This is true whether we are talking about natural selection or the orbit of planets.

I am saying that if nature is deterministic, then it can be said to have purpose, one probably unknowable to us, but purpose and meaning nonetheless. Where there is purpose there is will.

[Angrboda]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Consideration of purpose, meaning and direction means little without context.

Believe you that nature is deterministic? If so, then surely most everything outside the control of organisms with advanced brains & free will has been fated, no? Even these things are deterministic, because whether an organism survives and passes on its thought patterns depends on how much those thought patterns align with its environment and give it a survival and reproductive advantage. I want to be very, very clear that I am not trying to invoke the God of the gaps, or 'haha there is a gap in empirical knowledge here, atheists BTFO' or any such silliness. I am talking about the ultimate consequences of natural laws, by which I mean the direction in which they cause the universe to move towards.

Surely? No. When all you've got is, "It's obvious!" Casting aspersions about the intelligence of others is ill-advised.

[Fireball]

Believe you that nature is deterministic? If so, then surely most everything outside the control of organisms with advanced brains & free will has been fated, no? Even these things are deterministic, because whether an organism survives and passes on its thought patterns depends on how much those thought patterns align with its environment and give it a survival and reproductive advantage. I want to be very, very clear that I am not trying to invoke the God of the gaps, or 'haha there is a gap in empirical knowledge here, atheists BTFO' or any such silliness. I am talking about the ultimate consequences of natural laws, by which I mean the direction in which they cause the universe to move towards.

So your position is that nature is deterministic in the context of life forms/living things?

You still have not identified a source of "will". So far all you've presented is supposition.

---

Obvious troll is obvious.

Don't break this one, not quite yet.

This one is already broken. What's the over-under on what its exit strategy will be? 1st Amendment violation by the meanie atheists?

[Foxaèr]

I think I might be dumber for having read the OP, foolishly thinking perhaps there was a little nugget of wisdom hidden amidst the word salad.

[Rhizomorph13]

Op that is a mighty fine scarecrow you built and summarily knocked down! I give it a 2/10.

None of those have anything to do with my atheism.

My friend Purple Rabbit's 26 dimension vacuum cleaner told me there was no God and I believe it! Or maybe something else. You would have to actually engage in conversation to find out but I don't think you are going to be here that long seeing as you started so poorly.

[vulcanlogician]

I actually have a soft spot for pantheism, but I must say, your OP is a piss poor advertisement of it. Who begins his grand essay on pantheism with, "You atheists think you've got it all figured out, don't you?"...???

No, nature is deterministic overall. This is true whether we are talking about natural selection or the orbit of planets.

I am saying that if nature is deterministic, then it can be said to have purpose, one probably unknowable to us, but purpose and meaning nonetheless. Where there is purpose there is will.

What about determinism suggests purpose? Purpose is a vague word. What do you mean by "purpose"? Something separate from teleology? And if so, how so?


I think it's interesting to imagine the entire universe as having (or being) a will. That our ordinary willful actions (like those we commit ourselves) are perhaps not fundamentally different than, say, the orbiting of the planets is also an interesting idea.

But you've got to be careful about assuming too much. It's an interesting question, and one that pantheists can perhaps say more about than "traditional" atheists can (or care to). But, Pantheism (by and large) doesn't pretend to know more about reality than atheism. It's an interpretive mode rather than a theory about what God (or the universe) actually is.

[The Valkyrie]

Aren't you precious...bless your heart.

Yes, I came here expecting a somewhat rational argument & all I've gotten is snark. I suppose I am rather precious & naive.

You won't get snark from me.

Stop being an arrogant little cunt and we can have a conversation.

[Seax]

I actually have a soft spot for pantheism, but I must say, your OP is a piss poor advertisement of it. Who begins his grand essay on pantheism with, "You atheists think you've got it all figured out, don't you?"...???

No, nature is deterministic overall. This is true whether we are talking about natural selection or the orbit of planets.

I am saying that if nature is deterministic, then it can be said to have purpose, one probably unknowable to us, but purpose and meaning nonetheless. Where there is purpose there is will.

What about determinism suggests purpose? Purpose is a vague word. What do you mean by "purpose"? Something separate from teleology? And if so, how so?


I think it's interesting to imagine the entire universe as having (or being) a will. That our ordinary willful actions (like those we commit ourselves) are perhaps not fundamentally different than, say, the orbiting of the planets is also an interesting idea.

But you've got to be careful about assuming too much. It's an interesting question, and one that pantheists can perhaps say more about than "traditional" atheists can (or care to). But, Pantheism (by and large) doesn't pretend to know more about reality than atheism. It's an interpretive mode rather than a theory about what God (or the universe) actually is.

Finally a thoughtful response! Thank you, I was worried I wasn't going to get a single one, and I really appreciate it.

I am not suggesting that the planet are animated by the same mental faculties as man or other mammals, I am saying the the entire universe, all of reality. is an expression of God and at least as far as we are concerned, inseparable from God. Like atheism, pantheism does away with the primitive notion of anthropomorphic personal deities, but pantheism understands that the universe, nature, all of reality—is God.

I was raised an atheist, and I never found Christianity very appealing. but something sat wrongly with me. Life derived from lifeless proteins that began to reproduce themselves, and from this process everything alive today derives. Evolutionary biology is for me not just an empirical reality—but a more compelling story than anything in the Old Testament. And it is a directed process—directed by nature in the form of greater reproductive success for genes with a survival or reproductive advantage. The evolution of complex lifeforms is not just happenstance, it is as inevitable under natural laws as the earth rotating around the sun.

Classical theism isn't a terrible worldview, but when everything can be explained naturalistically, and nearly everything in our lives can be in the 21st Century, the existence of an anthropomorphic Interventionist God separate from nature is hard to justify. I have noticed that whenever pressed, Christians and all other classical theists retreat into pantheism—they talk of God operating through natural processes. But atheism has the same problem—how can you explain that natural laws should lead to ever greater progress, towards ever more complex life, if nature is ultimately devoid of meaning or purpose?