Expert: Philip A. Stahl - 9/4/2010

Question
I have read many of the questions and answers with interest. A detached interest I will say because some time ago I decided to simply believe that there was a Creator. That does not mean that I necessarily follow certain teachings, but I do take the words of Jesus as a way to live and try to believe as a child would. All that has been built up around those words remains suspect to me.

Having said that, I see the effort that many people put into "believing". Some are once a year believers and some work very hard daily to confirm their beliefs.

Sorry for the long intro to my question but I know a lot about this side of the equation but very little about the other side. (I am not sure if atheists are disbelievers or non believers!) Since my philosophy requires very little effort and a whole lot of faith, what kind of effort does it take to be an atheist? Specifically, you seem to have worked this through on many levels for yourself; do you ever have doubts about your faith or lack of faith? (Once again I am not sure what to call it!) Thank you for your time and I wish you well.  

Answer
Hello,

For me as an atheist, it doesn't take *that much* effort, mainly because I am not dogmatic or 'hard core' (I believe the word is 'explicit atheist' as opposed to an 'implicit atheist'). Being in the latter category, I do not actively disbelieve in a deity, but simply withhold belief in any pre-existing claims for one.

As I noted in an article published in the 'Mensa Bulletin', March 1994:

"Let's be clear about what constitutes Atheism and what doesn't. The Atheist - to put it succinctly, absolutely withholds investing intellectual/emotional resources in any supernatural claim. Indeed the word Atheism itself embodies this definition (Gr. a-theos, absence of (belief in) god)”

What is happening here is not active disbelief, i.e. making a statement 'There is no god', but rather simply passively withholding belief/acceptance in a statement already made.  Hence, the deity believer has made the positive claim. The ontological or implicit atheist’s is the absence of belief in it. No more - no less.

In my mind it's analogous to a neighbor pounding on my door and insisting a mob of alien ghosts from Tau Ceti just invaded his attic. I withhold belief in his claim, and await his evidence - since the burden of proof is solely on him as the one who is (putatively) adding to reality. The same with "God". It is not my job to disprove the claim, since proving a negative is logically infeasible.

Once the burden of proof is understood, it becomes easier for the implicit atheist to deal with a whole spectrum of issues, including those arising from theodicy (existence of natural and man-engendered evil in the world). In this case since the assumed "divine" never intervenes, even when his children call It to, one can reasonably infer non-existence. (Or, the difference between its effectuality predicated on claimed existence or non-existence is insignificant.)

It also helps that I am a committed Materialist (scientific Materialist, or more accurately 'physicalist'  - because quantum mechanics enables us to extend the warp and woof far beyond Democritos' little hard atoms!) Thus, if there hasn't been shown to be a solid physical basis for an entity, as elucidated by its necessary and sufficient conditions to exist (then providing the basis either empirically or quantitatively via abstract theory) then it isn't incumbent upon me to accept it as any more than aimless blather. On a par with ghostly aliens in attics!

I don't lose sleep over whether ghost aliens exist in my neighbor's attic (barring any convincing evidence he's shown) and I don't lose sleep as to whether a god exists or not.

Hopefully, this makes my position clear!