Atheism and logic
By thorell
@thorell (24)
United States
January 25, 2009 7:50pm CST
What are some of your thoughts on it? Agree or disagree, let's see why. I won't deny that I have an atheist disposition, but I promise to be respectful. =)
2 responses
@Uroborus (908)
• Canada
27 Jan 09
I personally feel that Agnosticism is more supported by logical argument than Atheism. Atheism seems to try and counter the supposed irrationality of religion with logic, but Atheism itself seems to be illogical also. I say this because the question of God's existence (or lack thereof) is at its core an illogical one.
Atheists seem to use the uncertainty that arises from this to argue that God doesn't exist. But it's highly illogical to point to a LACK of evidence as a proof for non-existence. The only logical conclusion that lack of evidence for God can lead to is that there is no proof that God exists. It is not logical to argue that lack of proof for God's existence proves that he doesn't. All you can say is that God may or may not exist, which is the Agnostic position.
@thorell (24)
• United States
27 Jan 09
Thanks for the thought out response.
It seems to me that atheism and theism are statements about belief in god(s) while agnosticism is not. Rather, agnosticism is a statement of provability which almost everyone takes when pressed. With careful examining, we must acknowledge that we have an agnostic stance even to reality itself. Therefore, if it applies to everything, it means nothing. Thoughts?
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
20 Feb 09
Not all atheists point to lack of evidence for proof on non-existence. Most people misunderstand atheism and agnosticism. They believe they are two separate philosophies, but they are not. You can be both atheistic, and agnostic, and most people usually are.
Atheism means "no God". You don't have to believe there is no God to be an atheist, you simply have to lack belief in gods. Agnosticism means "without knowledge". Anyone who admits they don't know and can't prove the existence or non-existence of a God is an agnostic. You can be an agnostic theist, or an agnostic atheist. Pure agnostics don't exist, because people usually a pre-disposed to have some belief or lack thereof in gods.
@Sagehill15 (49)
• United States
3 Mar 09
I am an atheist. God is an idea, so in that sense he will always exist. There is no way to disprove such a thing as God just as there is no way to disprove Santa Claus. Whether they hold their power in divinity or magic there is no way to disprove them from a logical standpoint because the basis of their existence is illogical.
Since God is exempt from all the rules of human logic there is a counter arguement for every argument against his existence.
Since I cannot see, hear, smell, touch or taste God, whether or not he exists does not matter to me at all. God has conveniently given us all free will, so we cannot expect him to intervene in our lifetime. I see no point in believing in something that has no effect on my life. Believing in Santa Claus got me more presents.
If I die and God pops out of nowhere and says 'surprise! You didn't believe in me now your going to hell!' I will just laugh at the idiocy of the whole situation.
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
20 Feb 09
What exactly are you asking about? Did you want to know if we thought atheism is logical? In which case my answer would be yes, atheism is logical, as it is a conclusion based on the evidence at hand. There's no evidence of gods, so why believe in them? It simply doesn't make sense.
