|
bill: I think the thing is that the Atheists for the most part don't really believe in anything spiritual so unless you can prove conclusively that spirituality exists, then I don't think they should have to defend their argument. Not believing in something intangible and invisible may be the simplest answer, but I do not think that it is the easiest answer. Atheists must deal with a world that doesn't particularly care what happens to them, their life has no spiritual or instrinsic value, they are just another organism, living or doing whatever. They don't usually see a life after death or some other such continuation. Once it's over, it's over. They are faced with the idea that once they are no longer alive, there IS nothing else. They must, therefore, live as best they can right now, because they won't get another chance or even a reward for their actions. In that same line, I think it interesting that they still have a sense of "morality" or at least subjective right and wrong, because they behave just like everyone else, if not better in most cases (from a subjective viewpoint) even though they will recieve no reward or punishment when they cease to exist. Perhaps they just value them as important social constructs, as CSFilm mentioned, they benefit human society.
I suggest closely reading CSFilm's posts as they seem to be very informative about atheists.
I personally don't see any reason for atheists to force their lack of belief on other people in the same way that I don't see any reason for religious people to force their beliefs on other people. I mean, they may have a good reason, but it's still not very nice. And if there is one correct belief or lack of belief, time will probably resolve what arguments cannot.
|