I'm going to cover ground that has been covered before in this thread; maybe we can all get it up to 20 pages reiterating the same philosophical points.
Quote:
Originally posted by prosequence
I think some people are getting a little wonky.
The REASON for this post was to see if anyone had ideas of how to prove Atheists exist, other than them just saying so. I didn't mean offence, I was curious.
I do find it interesting though that some are experiencing the same frustration that those who believe in God have when asked to prove God exists. It's pretty tough not relying on "I just know"
or "It's what I believe so therefore it's real".
The reason I asked "what purpose does it serve?" is because most belief systems were created to serve a purpose, I admit I'm ignorant and don't know what purpose Atheism serves, please enlighten me.
|
This seems to be the post around which the whole thread revolves. It's a cute argument and it is true that nothing can be proven to exist. I cannot even prove my own existence, I could just be a brain in a vat with a simulated consciousness. Based on the evidence available to me, I can reasonably believe that I exist, despite my comment earlier in this thread. I am less inclined to believe that you exist because I cannot see you. I can interact with you though so I do have faith in your existence.
I have observed so little evidence as to the existence of God that I am currently not inclined to believe that he exists.
We have established that there are humans who believe that they and other humans exist. Some of these humans call themselves "Christians" and others call themselves "atheists". Some others even call themselves "teacups" and we believe they exist too even if we do feel a bit sorry for them.
Your point is that the concept of atheism exists only because theism exists. Of course - It would be pointless and meaningless for me to say that I did NOT believe in blargchuchux unless somebody else had at one time said they DID believe in blargchuchux. So for the concept of atheism to exist, the concept of theism has to have existed. This does not mean that God exists. The belief does not establish the reality.
If I falsely believed that you existed when in fact you were an elaborate computer program, my previous faith in your existence would not be enough to somehow bring you to life any more than the posting of this thread will give birth to dear old blargchuchux. The fact that atheists have conceded the existence of theists is really no vindication for the theist's belief in the existence of a higher power - atheists were already perfectly willing to concede your existence on the basis that you were a human being who was standing there in front of them declaring yourself to be a "Christian". They never agreed to believe what you believed just as they were never foolish enough to try and pour boiling water on a "teacup's" head.
Now you ask if atheism serves a purpose beyond a non-belief in God. I have to confess that, as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't. This does not mean that atheists are shallow human beings whose lives are devoid of purpose. A devout Christian whose faith is the source of 90% of their moral values would think that the "believers" in the atheist "faith" gain 90% of their values from atheism; that their belief in NON-belief must therefore make them amoral and spiritually empty.
I am an agnostic but my morality does not come from there or directly from any religious source. Some of it comes from humanism, specifically <a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/humanism.htm">secular humanism</a>, which I find to be a good means by which to understand the world around me and something that does not fundamentally rely on the belief or non-belief in a deity.