Expert: Vincent M. Wales - 5/30/2010

Question
QUESTION: What I know of "Atheism" is denial in the existence of God. As a beginner in Philosophy, I get confused in understanding why "Atheist" put considerable time and effort in denying/arguing/debating on something which according to them is not there.

Why Atheist argue on "Nothing"? Why not move one step forward and don't give a "thought" about God?

No offense intended at all..

ANSWER: Varun:

There are several different things your question touches upon, so let me start with your first statement.  You claim that atheism is the "denial" of the existence of a god.  Note that your statement itself presumes the existence of a god.

In truth, atheism (as a concept) is not the denial of anything.  Rather, it is the lack of a subscription to a theistic belief system.  Now, of course, many who label themselves as atheists will, in fact, take a strong stance and say, "No, there's no god."  But not all of them do, nor is this a requirement of being an atheist.  Many atheists take a more moderate stance, saying, "I just don't see enough evidence of a god to make me accept the idea."  They're not saying there definitely isn't one, necessarily, or the possibility of one.  They're just saying, "I'm not willing to take this on faith alone; give me some actual evidence."  For reasons muddled in history, these people are now referred to as "agnostic."

This is rather ironic, when you think about it.  The term "agnostic" literally means "without knowledge."  And the thing is, Varun, that definition applies to everyone, even the most ardent believers.  There's not a person alive who has knowledge about the existence (or lack thereof) of a god.  There are a lot who THINK they do, but when it comes right down to it, it's really nothing but opinion, not any sort of knowledge.  The term "agnostic" is a relic that never should have been introduced to theistic discussion.

Those who label themselves agnostic, with the meaning of "I don't know if there's a god or not," are atheists.  Why?  Because they do not subscribe to a theistic belief system.  Here's an analogy for you:  If I were to ask you (or anyone) if it was going to rain in New York City next Thursday, the only thing we could do is speculate.  You could check the long-term weather forecasts, and you might see a good indication of the probability that it will rain.  But you don't KNOW it will.  Or, you could look at the weather and see no indication whatsoever for the possibility of rain.  Again, you still don't know.  It's all opinion, no matter how strong.  Because actual knowledge, based on the information available to is, is impossible.  So, with religious belief, it's an either/or situation.  If you say, "Yes, I believe there is a god," then you have a theistic belief system.  You are a theist.  If you cannot say this, then you do not have a theistic belief system.  And this is true whether you actively deny the existence or are merely unsure.  If you can't positively say you believe, then you lack the requirement of being a theist.  Therefore, you're an atheist.  There's no middle ground.  Being unsure isn't in the middle, since the topic isn't about proof, but about belief.

Given this, your question of why (some) atheists make all the effort to argue against the idea of god would make perfect sense.  But religious belief is not just a philosophical stand.  Many societies around the world inflict religion - or laws based on religion - on the citizens.  A good example currently being hotly debated in the U.S. is the idea of same-sex marriage.  The ONLY reason out there for denying this right is a religious reason.  When you remove the "sin" aspect of it, there's no sensible reason to deny it.  This is just one of many, many examples of how religious belief affects those who don't subscribe to it.  So the argument in this case is less about whether or not there's a god, as it is about freedom.

To be fair, there are some people who do argue the point (on either side) just for the sake of arguing.  Some people are just argumentative by nature.

Third point: you assert atheists are arguing about "nothing."  Well, not really.  Consider this: the word "atheist" only describes what the person is NOT.  It says nothing about what the person IS.  I've been a non-believer for three decades, and I've met a LOT of atheists in my time.  And one thing I can say is true for the vast majority of them: they do have belief systems.  They're just not systems that involve the concept of a deity.  Most atheists of my acquaintance could fairly be described as secular humanists.  In other words, they believe that human responsibility is key.  No chalking things up to "God's will," etc.  We believe treating our fellow humans with kindness and understanding is just the right thing to do, not because an ancient book tells us to do it and threatens us if we don't.  What I'm getting at is that those of us who occasionally "argue" about this subject are not arguing in favor of "nothing," but in favor of something a little more down to earth.

Finally, don't ever assume that atheists have not given considerable thought about the idea of a god.  Most of us have.  Most of us, in fact, started out as believers until we saw the flaws in the design.  For us, giving thought about God is a step backward, not forward.





---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Your last sentence " For us, giving thought about God is a step backward, not forward."

But I didn't say that..

Answer
Ah.  So you didn't.  My apologies.  (That's what I get for answering questions first thing in the morning.)  Let me amend.

I would dearly love to never give another thought about religion whatsoever.  Unfortunately, if I (and millions like me) stopped concerning ourselves with such matters, we'd find ourselves living in a theocracy in pretty short order.  Too many theists are gung-ho about inflicting their beliefs on others, or at least their sense of morality.

I hope the rest of the answer was at least informative for you.