theemporer said:
The problem with this argument is that atheists also make an assertion, the assertion that no god/goddess/etc. could exist. They give no proof other than that there is no proof. The belief in spiritual beings has existed for thousands of years, it is a paradigm that atheists wish to diverge from, yet they have no evidence against it. The faithful argue on a philosophical level because, by definition, God etc. cannot be known or observed physically. Thus the lack of physical evidence is meaningless.
For one, not all religions hold that their spiritual being is omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent. There are also religions (Ancient Greek, for example) that claim that their gods are represented in nature. Regardless, the requirement of a natural proof in order to consider the possibility of a divine being that cannot be observed in nature is simply contradictory. I do not claim that they should believe in a divine being because it is possible but I don't understand the logic in denying it based on a lack of evidence that should not exist.
I don't think I was discussing something like this in my original post but what do you mean by "The discussion can't even agree on the same topic"? Also, The denial of scientific discovery usually comes from a dogmatic, literal reading of sacred texts, for example, assuming that the story of Adam and Eve should be seen as historical fact rather than as an allegory. Without looking at the texts in such a literal way, one can better reconcile religion and modern science. Also, the idea that science can find any kind of fact, that can be proven without any doubt is dogmatic in itself. While future developments may prove a "natural fact" to be incorrect, science holds it as absolute fact that cannot be disputed.
I never really said that atheists are without morals. All I meant to say was that atheists have no reason to be think morally, considering that they believe that we just rot in a hole when we die, regardless of what we do in life. While pushing ones beliefs on others is indeed wrong, there are some times when you have to. Cannibals, serial killers, etc. often believe that what they are doing is right. I suppose it's pushing our moral beliefs on others if we arrest criminals?
Wow there's lots to counter in this post. I will focus on the statements that I bolded in your text.
1. There are two primary stances on atheism. There are the so called "strong" atheists, which do posit that it would be impossible for a god or supreme being to exist. And then there are also the so called "weak atheists" or agnostic atheists which simply lack a belief that a God exists. They have not been given sufficient evidence that would indicate that such a god exists, and therefore they stick to the default position one should always take when given spectacular claims without proof: lack of belief. the majority of atheists are agnostic atheists, including myself. I don't state outright that a god does not exist, I have just not been given sufficient evidence to prove to me that one does. If today someone gave me absolute irrefutable proof that their god existed then I would convert to their religion. That said, I am 99% certain that the God of the Christian bible does not exist, because that book is so contradictory that it's logically impossible for this God to exist.
2. As a scientist and rational human being, I "believe", for lack of a better word, that any phenomena that occurs in the natural world can be explained through natural means. Over the last few centuries, science has found natural explanations for nearly every single phenomena that previously was only explained by religion. Religion really just has no more ground to stand on anymore. If your God exists, then what is he doing?? He's not causing any miracles, he's not doing anything that couldn't already be explained by natural laws of the universe, he's not answering prayers or helping the sick get better, he's not healing amputees. What is your God doing, and why should I believe in him if there is not a shred of evidence that he's making any impact on the natural world? I'm not even asking to SEE your god, just any sign that he may actually be making changes to the world. I have not been given any evidence of any kind that shows that he is doing anything, if he exists, so I choose not to believe that he exists. It's simple, really.
3. On using the bible as allegory. This is a slippery slope you're going down. The Bible is supposed to be the perfect and unaltered word of God, and it is supposed to be infallible and completely true, correct? So then why are you taking bits of the Bible as allegory, and others as literal truth, when there is no way to infer which ones are true and which are "just pretend". Was Jesus an allegory? The 10 commandments? Any story within the bible could be seen as an allegory, and yet religious people tend to assume that some of them are true, historical events, and others are just made up to make a point. They do this because some of the stories are so batshit crazy that they cannot justify it to others or themselves as truth, so they assume it was made up. But there is no basis within the bible that would indicate which stories are true or not, they are all presented as absolutely true and infallible. Is the quote saying that disobedient children should be stoned to death just an allegory? Is the one that says that a father has a right to sell his daughter into slavery one? Christians neglect and explain away all the uncomfortable parts of their religion, but they wholly accept the warm fuzzy parts as literal truth, even though they are just as believable as the parts they rationalize away.
4. If a new discovery proves a scientific theory "wrong" then the theory is adapted to accomodate the new evidence. That's kind of how science works... Science doesnt just ignore new evidence and stick their fingers in their ears and shout "LALALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU!" That's religion's job.
5. Atheists absolutely have reasons to act morally. Morality is NOT divinely constructed. Morals are built based on social norms. Humans are social animals. We need each other to survive and to be happy. Sure, as an atheist there's no incentive for me beyond this life to be a good boy so that I get my present in heaven. But there is absolutely incentive for me to behave in order to get the most out of the life that I do have. If I went around murdering and raping random people, I'd be thrown in jail or killed for it, which is bad for me living happily. Also I am a human being, I care for other people and their wellbeing, I want to help them and I want everyone to be happy as much as possible. Why would I want to harm another person for no reason? I am not being nice as a way to get to heaven, I'm being nice because in a small way, it makes the world a better place to live in, and makes other people, and myself happier. And since we all have to live together, that's a good thing.
