Certainty & Atheism

[PaxRomana]

Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position? Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known? How can you be certain of what is unknown?

[Divine Insight]

Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position?

In some cases I believe it is. You must also understand that atheism is merely a disbelief that a particular God exists. Everyone is an atheist with respect to the gods of the religions they don't believe in.

I am a very strong atheist with respect to the Abrahamic Picture of God. This includes the God of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

I am certain that this God cannot possibly exist verbatim as described by these mythological religions.

Why? Because these myths themselves are so utterly self-contradicting that they make it impossible for the God they describe to exist.

So I can be certain that these Gods do not exist (as described by these religions verbatim)

Does this mean that there cannot be a generic God in general? No. And so in that respect I remain agnostic in terms of a possible spiritual or mystical nature of reality.

Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known?

I know that the biblical God cannot exist verbatim as described by the Bible. That description violates it's own claims of what that God is supposed to be.

The God of the Bible is supposed to be an infinitely wise and intelligent supreme being, yet it the stories describe it behaving and acting like a complete immature idiot.

Therefore the Bible cannot possibly be a valid description of the God it attempts to claim exists.

How can you be certain of what is unknown?

I can't be. And this is why I am agnostic with respect to the true nature of reality, or even the possible existence of some type of "God".

But what I can be absolutely certain of is that the Bible cannot be a valid description of any God that might potentially exist.

[Goat]

Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position? Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known? How can you be certain of what is unknown?

It is rational due to the lack of evidence, provisiotnally, until such time that objective and tangible evidence can be presented. Things are always up for reevaluation , pending new evidence.

[PaxRomana]

[Replying to post 3 by Goat]

Hi Goat! I guess I'm trying to make a distinction between certainty that there is nothing, and lack of certainty because no evidence yet exists (or may ever exist).

I'm going to go take an aspirin now after trying to make sense of my own post!

[McCulloch]

Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position? Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known? How can you be certain of what is unknown?

I am certain that there are no married bachelors, aren't you? Depending on how you define God, I am either a strong atheist, believing that your definition leads inevitably to a contradiction; an agnostic, believing that there is no way to say whether your God does or does not exist; or an ignostic, concluding that your definition is meaningless or not cohesive. I believe that my position is quite rational.

[Overcomer]

You make a good point, Pax Romana. In order for someone to say that they believe with certainty that there is no such thing as God, they would have to know everything there is to know in the universe -- and no one does. Therefore, that leaves the possibility of God existing. Therefore, nobody can validly claim to be certain that God doesn't exist. They can only say that they don't think God exists. That would make people agnostic, not atheist.

There is evidence for God -- cosmological, teleological, axiological, ontological, experiential, historical, etc. The atheist who says there isn't either hasn't done his homework and researched it or he has researched it and can't refute it; therefore he says there is none so that he can avoid the issue entirely.

I have no problem with atheists who acknowledge there is evidence and then proceed to present valid, intelligent arguments against it to legitimize their rejection of it. I do have a problem with those who claim there isn't any. It's just an easy way out of having to defend their position.

And you're right. There's nothing rational about saying with certainty that God doesn't exist when they can't know that for sure.

There's only one thing that keeps people from God -- sin. It has nothing to do with a supposed lack of evidence.

[wiploc]

[Replying to post 1 by PaxRomana]

Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position?

You don't have to be certain of anything to be an atheist. All you have to be to be an atheist is not a theist. Even the strong atheists, those who believe gods don't exist, aren't necessarily certain. They mostly believe gods don't exist, as opposed to knowing it.

But there are many things one can be sure of. I'm certain that there is no free-roaming herd of mile-high elephants in Kansas. I'm certain that there are no large active volcanoes in Florida. I'm certain that the Earth wasn't struck by a 70-mile-wide asteroid yesterday. I'm certain that an omnipotent god could defeat iron chariots. I'm sure the modal ontological argument is fatally flawed. I'm sure there is no god who would prevent all evil if he could, and who could, and who doesn't.

Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known?

Of course. But does that mean we don't take any position at all? You don't know that there isn't a lion in the bathroom that will leap out and eat you when you open the door. But does this lack of knowledge mean you withhold belief? Do you cross your legs and suffer, or do you make a rational assumption?

How can you be certain of what is unknown?

How can you be certain we don't know?

[Artie]

[Replying to post 1 by PaxRomana]"Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position? Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known? How can you be certain of what is unknown?"

1. Atheism isn't "being certain that something does not exist". It is an absence of belief in the existence of gods, not a belief that gods don't exist. A subset of atheists called "strong atheists" in addition to having an absence of belief in gods also believe gods don't exist.

2. "Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known?" That is the position of agnostics. Don't confuse agnostics with atheists.

[Jashwell]

I'm slightly more certain that a God doesn't exist than that a car does not have a soul.

Is it rational to be certain that a car does not have a soul?

I would say to some degree of certainty, yes.

[Molly]

[Replying to PaxRomana]

Atheists, is being certain that something does not exist a rational position? Wouldn't the rational position be that you don't know what is not yet known? How can you be certain of what is unknown?

Atheism is not "being certain gods something don't exist" and more the position of "there is no evidence to believe god(s) exist." And most atheists are very open to hearing about/debating potential evidence for religious/supernatural/etc stances in order to challenge our own position.

It can be reasonable to believe that god doesn't exist (not certainty, but a belief) when there is no evidence (and many problems with the source of information of god (the Bible for Christianity, etc), logical consistency issues with his nature, and more).

You cannot be certain of what is unknown; I don't know any atheists who would follow that. You can see this in the difference in how atheists approach Christians vs deists or pantheists. The deistic god/pantheistic god is a great unknown. Jehovah may have aspects which are unknown, but there are parts of him that is knowable through his inspired holy books, religious doctrines (trinity), etc. It can be rational to not believe in a specific god with certain characteristics if those characteristics are intrinsically incoherent/incompatible/illogical, if his origin story/holy book have problems and/or are incompatible with the god, etc.

Is it rational to believe in an invisible miniature chupacabra with a tortoise shell who can help you fly if you leave him mutilated cow sacrifices every night at the local train station? Such a creature would be an unknown.