I wanted to put this question out there to see how strongly everyone feels on this subject. Being that most of us trust in scientific fact and reasoning, I was wondering if everyone is absolutely, undeniably, 100% sure that a god doesn't exist.  I personally take into account that there is no proof of any cosmic creator so therefore I am about 99.9999% sure that there is no god. However we all agree that science is an ever evolving field and I don't think that there will ever be any proof to support the existence of a supreme being, but I can't be 100% sure until there is concrete proof against one. I would like to know what all of your thoughts on this.  

Views: 8777

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

god live in peoples minds that all................no where eles
YES! Umm, can I say that I believe in Douglas Adams?
Just add an infinite number of 9's to the right of the decimal point and your 99.999...% will equal 100.
As skeptics we cannot say we are absolutely positive there is no god - just as religious people cannot say for sure there is. I think the default position should be atheism. My belief is that the possibility of god is as close as one can mathematically get to zero.
I knew I should have worded that differently :)

Most people say they know that zeus or the tooth fairy are not real so in that context I say the same about god.
"I think the default position should be atheism." - Kevin

It is. You don't believe in something before you've been introduced to the concept, and even then you must be convinced either upon hearing the claim, or upon further evidence (of any quality).

"All children are atheists and, were religion not inculcated into their minds, they would remain so."
-- Ernestine Rose

Just like you don't get the flu until you've been introduced to the influenza virus, and you don't actually exhibit symptoms until it's taken hold. The default position of a living human is 'not having the flu'.

- Gliktch
It would be convenient if that were so, but someone became the first theist without being told to -- how did that happen?
Jumping from hypothesis to conclusion without experimentation and verification. It's easy enough to do, and we constantly see people doing it, so it's no stretch to assume that the first theist just made up an answer and liked it.
But that would be a pretty radical hypothesis if atheism is the default state for humans. That premise is what I'm doubting.
I don't think animism is all that radical or unlikely of an assumption. We now know it to be incorrect, but primitive people couldn't know that the "explanation" that things are animated by unseen spirits was wrong. After all, people appeared to be animated by unseen spirits. If you cut up a dead person, with a stone knife, you can figure out how the joints and muscles move, but not what makes them move. My dog clearly assumes that inanimate objects have minds of their own when he sees them move unexpectedly. Gods are merely an outgrowth of animism. If trees move and clouds spit lightning because they have spirits, what's so radical about ratcheting up that assumption a few notches and assuming that all things are animated by the same spirit? It's almost logical even, if you don't know that the initial assumptions are wrong. I think religion started before sophisticated language did.
Then you don't think atheism is the default state -- that you "don't believe in something before you've been introduced to the concept, and even then you must be convinced either upon hearing the claim, or upon further evidence" -- I think you've made my point for me.
Arnold, I think it depends on what you mean by "introduced to the concept". If you think it up independently, then you introduce yourself to it, but you still must meet it for the first time. All animals are born atheists. Primitive animals draw incorrect conclusions about agency, but they start out as atheist.

And I would argue that animism is a far cry from theism. At least the things that animists believe are imbued with spirit actually exist and move from time to time. Theism is a human-only abstraction that puts the animating spirit at some remove from the object, in an invisible and undetectable place, beyond confirmation and disconfirmation. I don't think it was a big stretch from animism, but I also don't think it's an inevitable stretch, and we certainly aren't born with the idea. Apart from a few instances of independent invention, theism has generally been transmitted culturally. Some isolated tribes got along fine without it. Atheism is the default position--it's our natural state until we invent or are infected with theism.


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon



© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service