“Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too.” - Douglas Adams
I’m an atheist. I’d like to tell you why. Most of the arguments for being an atheist point to how it is more scientific or probable. I’m sure you’ve heard those before, so I’m not going to touch them. Instead, I’d like to focus on the reasons atheism can lead to a greater quality of life.
That said, I’m not here to convert anyone, just expose people to different ideas. I’m not on a crusade against religion. I’ve read many different books on various world religions. Even if I disagree with some of the founding points, the exposure to those ideas improved my philosophy towards life.
Common Arguments Against Atheism
I’d like to start by giving my rebuttal to many of the common arguments against atheism. I’m not even going to touch the circular logic of going to Hell or blasphemy. But here are some of the supposedly sensible objections to denying the existence of a god:
Morality
Morality doesn’t need to come from the threat of divine punishment. Religion can do much good, but it can be twisted to do evil as well. I believe ethics come from society. It comes from the basic principles of respecting the rights of others, service and altruism. You don’t need a god to explain morality anymore than you need Zeus to explain lightning bolts.
Afterlife
Another common objection is that in not believing in a god, you believe death creates infinite nothingness. I don’t have space to fully explain different theories on the life and death, but this doesn’t need to be so. Atheism only suggests that death is a current unknown.
Scott Adams suggested another possibility in his book God’s Debris. Your consciousness is based on a pattern stored on neurons in your brain. If this is the case, dying would simply pause the pattern and it would resume sometime in the future. With no delay being seen from the observer this would essentially mean you couldn’t experience death.
I’m not arguing that this theory is the way reality works, just that atheism isn’t surrendering to a nihilistic view of life. Instead, it is opening yourself to many different possibilities.
Meaning
This is an argument I’ve never quite understood. It basically goes that if you don’t believe in God, isn’t life meaningless? I think this is a rather weak argument since it assumes that meaning can’t be self-determined. It also assumes that without an invisible spirit watching you, life doesn’t have a purpose.
I pick a meaning for my life and I believe it is just as satisfying without conjuring a notion of a god. I believe a god can actually become a distraction from meaning since it causes you to focus on a divine overlord instead of what really matters – the other people and beings you share the world with.
Atheism for a Greater Quality of Life
Aside from being an atheist, I’m also a vegetarian. Beyond putting myself in two self-selected minorities, many of the arguments I’ve seen against vegetarianism are similar to those against atheism. A common cited reason people I know don’t want to eat meat is because they enjoy it too much. They don’t want to sacrifice.
This is hard to explain until you’ve tried both sides, but I don’t see avoiding meat as a sacrifice. Instead I see it as an opportunity to live a healthier life, reducing my chances of many chronic diseases and giving me more energy to do what I love. I also see it as removing the environmental and ethical discomfort in supporting an industry with questionable practices.
Similarly, I think a lot of believers don’t rationally believe in a god. But they don’t want to sacrifice the comforting notion that a being greater than themselves is watching down on them and helping them out.
But in focusing on that one benefit, you miss on the potential benefits of not believing in a deity:
- Freedom – The mental freedom to explore your world, learn and challenge your own assumptions. Instead of rejecting evidence that doesn’t fit your notion of a god, you can embrace everything with curiosity.
- Self-Reliance – Temporarily focusing on a god may keep you happy, but what about the long-term? Instead of expecting divine intervention to let everything work out, I focus on my own abilities and reasoning to improve my experience of life.
- Beauty – I believe beauty lies in the unknown. It lies in the things you can’t explain. That is what atheism really means. Instead of resorting to weak explanations of a deity creating the world, you see all the beautiful aspects of nature you currently don’t understand. Why tarnish evidence that the universe is larger and more magnificent than we ever realized by placing an invisible man in front of it?
Pantheism and Rational Spirituality
So far my arguments have been against the traditional notion of a god. That is an invisible, all-powerful being that not only created the universe but also, through conscious force, interrupts the rules of nature, that he himself created, to perform miracles for the benefit of one planet amidst billions of billions of stars.
The alternative to that doesn’t need to be a cold, hyper-rational, if-I-don’t-see-it-it-doesn’t-exist mindset. Pantheism (or as Richard Dawkins refers to it as “sexed up atheism”) is another choice.
Pantheism literally means “God is all.” It is the belief that the universe itself is god. That nature, humanity, science and truth are the reflection of god. In the most basic sense, this isn’t any different from atheism or science. But while atheism emphasizes what the atheist doesn’t believe in, pantheism presents the alternative.
I’m a follower of rational spirituality. Although it may sound like an oxymoron, rational spirituality means that truth, and your understanding of the world, enhance your appreciation of it. Instead of supplementing an unemotional scientific perspective with superstition, you find the emotional beauty in science and reason.
Read a book on evolutionary biology or quantum physics and it you soon realize how mind-blowingly amazing the universe actually is. The wonders of the New Testament, in my opinion, pale in comparison to how evolution works, the possibilities of string theory or quantum entanglement.
Appealing to a Higher Motive
God can serve a purpose in causing us to aspire towards something greater. But I don’t believe a theistic god is the only (or even the best) possibility here either.
Even beyond just appreciating nature and the world for beauty, you need an ideal to strive towards. A motivation that gives your life purpose and your broader actions meaning. An answer to the question, “What does it all mean?”
Finding your higher ideal is an incredibly personal task. It is a task that can’t be delegated or avoided by reading a holy book. I can’t tell you what your higher ideal should be. All I can show you is what mine is.
My higher motive is based on three separate principles:
- Truth - Complete understanding is the first part of my higher ideal. This means that there is intrinsic purpose in seeking the truth. And that faith or any suspension of the rational mind I possess is an inherent evil towards this goal. I don’t believe a lie at the most basic level can ever be superior to what reality actually is.
- Service – The second aspect of my higher ideal is service and morality. This means that there is intrinsic purpose in serving the greatest good and respecting the rights of others. Any act that harms the greatest good or infringes on the personal rights of another conscious being is inherently evil.
- Challenge - The final aspect of my higher ideal is that the pursuit of both truth and service is supposed to be challenging. Pain and struggle are not goals in themselves, but moving through challenges has intrinsic meaning if it moves you to greater truth and service. This means that no matter what happens to myself, there is a meaning in it if I choose to find it.
The two elements of rational spirituality and appealing to a higher motive do a far more elegant job of fulfilling me than adopting a specific religion and worshiping a god. Better yet, my beliefs are self-correcting. By placing the highest emphasis on truth, I am always willing to change my beliefs if evidence shows them to have errors.
Should You Become an Atheist?
I didn’t write this article to convert you. I fully expect not to have converted anyone who was already set in their beliefs. But just as I read religious and spiritual books to enhance my philosophy, hopefully this could do the same for you.
Further Reading for Atheism, Rational Spirituality and Higher Motives
Atheism:
- The God Delusion
- Letter to a Christian Nation
- God is Not Great
- The End of Faith
- The Blind Watchmaker
Science:
Spirituality and Philosophy:
- Buddhism Plain and Simple
- Tao Te Ching
- The Bhagavad Gita
- God’s Debris
- The Courage the Live Consciously (article)
I'm a speed-reading, vegetarian, holistic learning, productivity hacking recent university graduate. And, for the last five years I've been experimenting to find out how to get more from life.
My best argument against atheism is the mathmetics itself. Creation of most simple life form or cell which have the capability to feed, reproduce and survive with a very simple RNA is beyond our capability even with today’s advanced technology. Now how can I believe that , nature itself can form such a cell by itself! what is the chances? Zero?
Serdar,
That’s assuming cellular life was the first biological step. Something like a virus is far less complicated. If you started with just a nucleotide soup, getting a few pieces that would be able to replicate themselves (like a crystal) wouldn’t be improbable. I imagine that a cell membrane and eventually eukaryotic cells were much later additions.
Frankly, I don’t think the vague specifics of the beginning of life are the real issue. If evidence for evolution was much weaker, atheists would still grip to it. If evidence for creationism was even weaker, theists would ignore those weaknesses too.
Men decide with their hearts and justify those decisions with their brain, not the other way around, I’m afraid.
-Scott
Scott,
Great article. I’m an atheist too. When confronted on my lack of faith, I ask the faithful for direct, non-circumstantial evidence that their omnipotent/omnipresent/omniscient (You’d figure it would be easy to provide with those qualities, eh?) god(s) exist. The burden of proof is on them since they are the ones claiming god exists.
Of course, to date, no evidence has ever been provided to me.
Hi Scott,
Great article, it’s nice to see a practical approach, how atheism can benefit one’s life, as opposed to a scientific or philosophic refutation of the god concept… I was reading the comments and wow, you sure touched the theist’s nerves, which isn’t hard… they’ve been throwing their best irrational, circular arguments at you… sometimes I wonder, did they actually read their comment?… it seems to me that if they did, they would see the errors, but I guess that’s why their theists… anyway, just wanted to give you some support… keep up with the great articles!
Daniel,
I’m sure I have plenty of beliefs that fail up to logical tests if I looked closely enough. That’s part of being human.
I disagree with many theistic arguments, but I think there is benefit in having some humility to see where my own arguments might fall flat.
-Scott
Have you read anything by Donald Miller? Heard of the name? By the way this dialogue in this blog is awesome…I love a good “God” debate haha. The debates seem to ranges from far flung “hearsay” type “arguments” to well thought out logical deductions which are arguably objective. Great Blog Scott! By the way I bought the book about studying more effectively and it has totally reshaped the way I think..I went on Amazon and bought Cal Newports “How to be a straight A student” and it was great as well…as cliche as that title sounded it had some great points. I love being able to write and communicate with others…
Thanks Ben,
Glad you liked the book. Cal and I have talked a number of times, and our blogs have a lot of overlap, so I’m glad you bought his book too!
-Scott
Good post and even better arguments, especially the one about morality. It is used as a common argument by theists to defend their faith.
Frankly though, I believe the whole issue rests on an individual’s perception of ‘God’. Whether you imagine him to be an old man with a long grey beard living in space or simply as divine energy. Whether you look for ‘God’ as a source of strength during times of mental depression or whether you believe that faith in ‘God’ by itself will get you through all tight spots.
Also there is a not-so-subtle difference between not believing in God and branding religion and all those practicing it as evil. I haven’t read The God Delusion but a few excerpts and reviews I read (though admittedly reviews tend to be a lot more biased than they should be) suggest that Mr. Dawkins regards indoctrination of children as worse than ‘child sexual abuse’.
I do not believe that being atheist is necessary for appreciating the beauty of nature or the unknown. I, for one, believe in ‘God’ strongly (though the word has different connotations for me) and I believe that one’s fascination of the unknown, nature or anything for that matter has little to do with one’s belief in the divine (which is what I associate ‘God’ with). Ever come across the commonly purported myth that one can only ever be a ‘Science person’ or a ‘Humanities person’ but never both? The belief is more rampant than you think, along with the belief in success (at least academic success) due to inherent ‘talent’.
Scott,
You give a very interesting perspective. However, I would say that your article does not really propose arguments “for” atheism in the respect that it demonstrates why one should believe in atheism. Although I disagree with your philosophy (I am a Christian) you clearly demonstrate that even in the absence of the consciousness of God, people can still live moral and meaningful lives.
The points you brought up that are supposedly in favor of religion are actually based on the assumptions that there is no God. It comes from a basic assumption that man invented the idea of a “higher being” to help us live a better life or give our life meaning. But the question of what to believe is not about what is the most beneficial belief system but what is the truth. Of course, that is something that is cannot be definitively proven by either side.
Theresa,
This post isn’t designed to present rational evidence for why you should or should not believe in a higher being. (There’s plenty of that elsewhere)
Instead, I wanted to write about why I feel atheism isn’t a hollow philosophy emotionally or for meaning in life, as many theists claim.
-Scott
[...] own. In the end, it’s not the views you have, but what they allow you do. True story. Here is a nice article on that as well. I find it to be a much more effective beleif system, for too many reasons to list. [...]
Hi Scott,
It is an indeed enlightening article and I must say that it must have somehow influenced people’s opinions towards their own religion, especially those who devote their life to the so-called deities or god.
After reading your article, I find I’m quite similar to you too despite some minor differences. I’m an atheist and I also practise primitive taoism (developed by Lao Tze and further elaborated by Zhuang Tze).
I seek complete liberty and truth is above all. I embrace the oneness which I believe to be the ultimate truth and also the nature itself. I have never believed in deities and I don’t think they are in existence at all. Either they exist or not, it doesn’t matter. I believe most integrated people will never be influenced by this.
It is great to see people who are freed of all kinds of theologies that impose contraint on one’s freedom. People who attach themselves to deities and all kinds of entrapping belief will not be able to retain their genuine virtue that is granted to us by the nature.
-Frank
It does not really matter what any human being thinks or believes or wants to bellieve. What matters is to see the existential reality exactly as it is.
If you can know that no God exists as opposed to merely bellieving God is existing or God is not existing. Then you would have the basis for being an atheist. But you dont have that.
Who are you human being? That you who have no knowledge of your source or end can even have an opinion? Are you deluded. Your very existence as a living being as a person is proof that God exists.
Atheism is the ultimate blinding egoism!
Take 2 months out of your life and visualise scenes from the life of Jesus from the Jerusalem Bible, with eyes closed in silence making yourself every character in the scene one by one. Replay the scene, ask questions of the characters.
Soon you will learn this startling fact:
The only reason you have the abstract 5 senses of sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, plus emotions and consciousness, interacting with the physical material world is for you to in this existential reality, to find and love God and neighbour and to love yourself.
The meaning of life is to seek and find God and to learn what Gods form of love is.
Everything else. Food, clothing, shelter, friendship, goods is secondary to the search and love of God.
When you die, you die alone, you die naked, you die with no possesions. Everyone is equalised by death. Lifes only meaning therefore is between being born and dying and realising why the human has what he has. What the human builds, cities space stations, universities, thats all of absolutely no consequence and is absolutely of no importance whatsoever but is merely a manifestation of a disordered ego that comes from not accepting existential reality exactly as it is.
God exists because I in truth say he does because I experienced God. But your life is to come to the same knowledge or to come to its opposite.
Enjoy your difficult decision about whether or not to search with your authentic heart for God or to dedicate yourself to clever debates and conversations and avoid searching for God.
Kindest regards
Enzo,
Although you might be able to find a valid proof for God in the most general and abstract, you won’t in the specifics. Unfortunately, the specifics are what’s important since they define reality.
Maybe you should re-read the article by assuming I believe that God exists, but my definition is very different than yours…
-Scott
Scott
The problem of atheism is also a result of a false philosophy perhaps an ignorant one.
The cosmos with all its stars, planets and even the empty space between planets or the space between two quantum particles and even the particles and elements themselves, plus all bodies of living beings, this all falls into the domain of the material world.
These things specifically exist in existential reality, but these are not God. However this is all that science studies and can ever study and so scientists have made the assumption that nothing else exists, not realising that science cannot study God for God does not exist there where science can possibly reach.
So into this material world I pose the first grand questions of the philosophers.
How is it that things prefer to exist rather than to not exist?
How would it be if these things did not exist?
If they exist what is their origin and why do they exist in this manner and not another manner?
Now if somewhere in this material world there is a living being called Scott and Scott is not responsible for his own origin as were none of his ancestors and all dwell in the mystery of not knowing how it is that they have come to be. Then surely it is clear to see that a living spiritual being is a property of existential reality. If it is the case that you have one spiritual being in the universe called Scott, is it not reasonable that another one called God could potentially exist and who created both Scott and the material world? If there is another living spiritual being in the world called Enzo who writes blogs to Scott, then is it also not a property of existential reality for a relationship to exist? If A relationship could exist between Scott and Enzo, why is it impossible that a relationship could not exist between Scott and God and Enzo? Anyway the question now asked is how is it that a relationship even exists at all in existential reality? Why does relationship exist as opposed to rather not exist?
What does living spiritual being mean?
Can science find proof that Scott exists? The answer is no because Scott cannot be measured nor observed by Science. To measure a neuron firing and to call that Scott is as ridiculous as looking at a waterfall and saying God is the waterfall. To see Scotts body is merely to see matter. Scott is invisible to all other living beings.
Scott can only be observed by Scott when Scott reflects on himself and experiences consciousness. To see Scotts body is not to see Scott. Consciousness is like the screen where Scotts entire life is played like a film. But where is the place from where Scott observes his consciousness? Where is the place from where Scott takes decisions or imagines an action he is about to perform?
The question of does God exist, is flawed from its standpoint. If God does exist, it makes no difference to neither God nor the creation man for then the nature of the relationship is important not the question of existence. This shows that the way to experience God is via the faculty of relationship in the same way as Scott (who is not visible to Enzo) has a relationship with Enzo (who is not visible to Scott).
Would this be true?
Scott is a living spiritual being who created the material world and all other beings? If Scott did not do it why could another greater being then Scott and called God, not do it?
How is it that a living spiritual relationship forming being exists and that it is a property of existential reality?
Scott -
Great post and great blog!
You have done an excellent job having this discussion without the negativity that breaks down communication and the flow if ideas. I appreciate how you have articulated your beliefs, but even more how you have moved this discussion in such a positive and productive direction.
My compliments and appreciation to you for that!
One thing that becomes clear in these discussions is that dogmatism, prejudice, hate, shallow-thinking, and destructive attitudes don’t discriminate. But, neither do analytical thinking, deep reflection, generosity, moral behavior, and insightful viewpoints.
There are wrong and destructive attitudes on both sides which only serve to stop communication and prevent healthy discussion.
I feel that on the believer side of the discussion, they do a disservice to themselves and their position by insisting that its a matter of rational proof and apologetics. They rush in ready to fight and relying on tired arguments and faulty logic to win over and defend their love of God. Never seeming to realize that you can’t argue someone into love any more than you can argue a flower into existence.
I would not try to argue you out of your choice of atheism, nor would I try to argue for “proof” that God exists. I don’t think either of those things can be accomplished (in fact I have defended the beliefs of atheists to christians far more often).
If there were a way to prove the existence of God, then it wouldn’t be faith and it wouldn’t be Love – it would become an exercise in reason. It would not be a relationship, it would merely be a fact. Further than that, understanding of God would favor those who have access to and understanding of the proof. As it stands all people approach the question equally – without proof and without barriers.
For God to create Love, there must be free will. For there to be free will, there must be an equal choice. For there to be an equal choice, there can be no decisive conclusion one way or the other regarding the question of God. Otherwise we could only be as passionate about God as we are about gravity. It would become a force we are subject to and not a leap of faith or an exercise in love.
How one defines God is important in this discussion. But I don’t need to have a correct definition of my wife in order to know that I love her. And my definition of her grows and changes the longer I know her. I also may not be able to create any concrete proof that my love exists – but I know more than anything in my life that it’s true.
I couldn’t prove to someone rationally how to fall in love with their soul-mate despite the fact that I have found mine.
I believe that Atheists do themselves and others a disservice when they view faith as a failing of rational thinking and regard those who believe to mentally weak. They overlook their own emotional positions and come to a convenient conclusion on people and ideas that deserve more investigation.
(Scott, you showed a different attitude than that throughout this entire discussion and that is impressive and admirable.)
The tendency to look at the worst traits of people of faith as a basis to reject the ideas involved is an emotional one. One doesn’t have to look hard to see that many of the truly incredible advances in art, history, culture, science and philosophy were deeply intertwined with God and spirituality.
The crusades were horrendous and evil but its wrong to treat that as any honest reflection of the belief systems that were twisted to justify them. Events like that say more about fear, propaganda, xenophobia, greed, politics, engineering, economics, and simple human nature than they do about God.
There are people out there that feel they have a scientific basis for thinking that the earth is flat. No rational person would think that the rest of the scientific community is in any way respsonsible for that backward view. However this is how many people treat people of faith. (Granted, that is an example of something that can be objectively verified, but the point is that we should look for the best thinking, not the worst when engaging a topic)
I do think that people should use their faculties and reason to search for truth with great rigor, scrutiny and depth. I feel that your choice is much closer to honoring God than many who blindly accept without thinking at all. Likewise I believe that people should show faith by acknowledging that if God created the universe, then examination of it will only reveal more about God.
It is a failure of faith to fear science. And it is a failure of science to dismiss faith because of the faithful.
Thank you for your excellent blog. Very inspiring.
-cjm
p.s. I have spoken with both Donald Miller and Brian McLaren in person. They have some interesting insights on this topic. I first recommend McLaren’s book “A Generous Orthodoxy”. Miller’s books focus more on the relationship aspect of belief, but I liked “Blue Like Jazz” from him.
Any person has its views about life, and all of them must be respected if they respect life itself.
But, for many people life has no sense without religion or mysticism. That is my case as well.
For me, the most important things in this world are love and… PRAYER. So I need transcendence.
But I hate fundamentalisms. The fruit of true prayer is compassion, not violence.
And there are many, many atheists more “religious” for me (that is, more compassionate for others) than many so-called strictly “religious people”.
So, what you say in your blog interests me very much, and the same you as a person, regardless of your ideas about religion. What matters most for me are facts and attitudes.
All the best to you.
From Spain,
Juan Bielsa
cjm,
Thanks for contributing to the discussion.
Definition is very important. I’m an atheist in the sense that I don’t believe in God as he is traditionally defined. However both “god” and “atheist” are just words. Artificial labels designed to reduce complex philosophies down to a single point.
-Scott
why should one be compassionate if we believe i that we are just biochemical machines.And that there is nothing after a persons earthly life ceases to exist just a state of eternal non existence.
I see no reason why an aethist should be compassionate when according to him life as no higher meaning.
“Secular humanity” whats That????
To me secularism and humanity cant go together they are like Oil and Water.
“be good for goodness sake” they retort.
I wont be suprised if tomorrow they cry out
“be bad for badness sake”
As the Joker(played by late Heath Ledger) in the latest bateman flick says
“people are as good as the world allows them to be”
Well this applies only to the secularists and not to people who believe that life has a higher meaning and that there is more then this earthly existence.
Well i respect people of all religious beliefs.To me being secular is to respect the traditions and beliefs of all religions and not restrict them completely as is being the done in schools in france.
thank you
And a merry CHRISTmas.(and not the secular X’mas)
Bruce,
This is an old post, so I’m going to go light on the debate:
1. biochemical machines. Why is something less valuable if it is more mysterious? Why does a cause have more meaning if it is biochemical than if it is a ghost?
2. Secular humanity. I’m not an explicit follower, but justifying moral intuitions isn’t hard. Many philosophers borrow the concept of a social contract as the basis of morality. Secular life does not require moralistic relativism.
3. Life does have a higher meaning.
-Scott
im not a very smart person so i have not followed what you have said
It would be very nice of you to rephrase it in simpler language.
u r just being lucky Scott …. u have not encountered calamities in life …. maybe just minor problems of life. In times of calamity (tsunami, hurricane, etc.) who / where would u turn to? By reading news u just feel a great sympathy until u encounter it yourself. I think by just having a great philosophy of life wouldn’t be enough.
YAY NECROPOSTING! I can’t help but throw in my two cents here, tho this is an old post. Sorry.
I’m a recently “converted” Baha’i–I use quotations there because it was not a conversion for me. The ideals, thoughts and questioning that are central to the Baha’i faith were something I’ve grown up with. I was agnostic for almost ten years, bordering on atheism, simply because I disagreed with the Christian church. I felt that there was something else out there–be it a “God” or “Goddess” or “Universal Force” or what have you. I didn’t feel qualified to try to put a name to it.
I didn’t realize how much unrest this caused me. As soon as I signed my little card to declare that I was Baha’i (two months ago, now) something clicked. If I get overwhelmed, I can step back and think about a situation. One of the tenets of the Baha’i faith is detachment, and that has been VERY valuable to me these last two months. In fact, most of the ‘commandments’ of the faith are simply common sense, dressed up in prayer. (Which, you’re probably thinking, is why you just stick to common sense and forgo the prayer.
)
We value prayer, but there is no clergy mucking up one’s relationship with Baha. All legal matters are handled by the Universal House of Justice–do some googling if you want to see how well that’s put together, I don’t have the time to type up all the intricacies! We value writing and knowledge–Baha’u'llah, his forerunner the Bab and his descendents wrote SO MUCH it’s amazing–AND the fact that we value writing so much rather than oral tradition means the original value of the ‘holy’ works stays intact. (Unlike the Bible.)
Anyway, what I wanted to share in this post is a basic image from the Baha’i faith you might find appealing–maybe not. Baha’u'llah says that we cannot hope to understand Baha any more than a table can hope to understand it’s carpenter. That image spoke to me–as you mention above, the Christian faith sees one “God” while Hindus see “another” and so on–here, we acknowledge there is a divine presence of some sort but make no attempt to reign it in to the whims of mankind.
So yeah. Hope it wasn’t a waste of your time. Not trying to convert you, just presenting a different (but yet, similar) point of view.
Hey Scott…so glad I stumbled upon your site. You have made another huge fan. Looking over your archive, I can’t wait to read all the juicy subjects that speak right to me. I love the way you think and highly respect your intelligence. I’ve bookmarked your site and will be coming back daily to ponder your words of wisdom…thanks for your work. Specifically, I’m really pondering this question about God, and you’ve helped me to start thinking outside the box as far as common arguments for God. What I keep coming back to is that I have a driving desire to know what my purpose is…why do I exist. As far as I know, there is nothing in all of the universe which exists that can be proven to not have a creator (granted, much of it we don’t know whether it was created or not…thus the debate). However, I can give millions (OK…lots) of examples of things that I can prove exist because they were created by a creator. My understanding (if you can call it that) of the scope of science is to use observations like this and experiments to draw conclusions about the larger physical material world. Wouldn’t my observations about existing things which have a creator, while not proving anything, provide stronger evidence in a scientific arena pointing towards the conclusion that the universe had a creator? I’d be thrilled if you were able to help out to a fellow open-minded (yet much less-intelligent) truth-seeker. Thanks!
Kevin,
I’d suggest reading The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins, as an understanding for the creative (but, unconscious) powers of evolution as an explanation for “design” in nature.
I’m not against the belief in God. I think believing in *something* is important as it shapes our philosophy of life. However, I feel when the claims for that something are too specific, and observably false, you enter into a dangerous territory. Philosophies such as Daoism and Buddhism offer many of the comforts and perspectives of religion without making falsifiable claims. (At least in some sects)
Got it. I don’t advocate a specific religion…I actually don’t like religion. What I know of buddhism (much of it) I really like, just like I love the morality of Jesus. I need to look into Daoism…have to admit I don’t know much. I will also look into Blind Watchmaker, thanks for the tip. Right now I’m deconstructing everything I’ve learned, all the assumptions I’ve made. I don’t want to make any ‘leaps’, my goal right now is to honestly look at if that ‘something’ exists at all or if it’s something we just created. My goal isn’t to assign attributes to the ‘something’, just to examine if it’s reasonable that the ‘something’ exists. I’d love to see some kind of follow up on the subject in the future. Thanks again for your service to society…I really like the way you think.
It is always not enough to see a garden is beautiful without thinking what beauty behind it…
Science is not created by this thinking, it is created by thought of “there is always something behind something”…
I’m a Moslem, and I advise you to take The Holy Koran, and you’ll see some explanation, a lot-lot of explanation for people like you…
See Sura el-Muddatsir…
You’ll understand…
If i don’t believe gravitation it doesn’t mean gravitation doesn’t exist.
If believe something that doesn’t exist for others, it will become exist at least for me.
So if I doesn’t believe but others, it will become no-exist for me
And every people seems always have arguments for what their believe or not
I believe in God like as a source of all then i let go off my religion, because religion is not God itself
Beieve in God or not for others is not too important for me
But the truth always exist either i believe or not
Because, i think if all in the world either atheist or not living in peace and harmony we don’t need any God, either exist or not.
PS:english is not my firs language
Not that you need more comments, but I’d just like you to know what a feel good article this is. Truly. Thanks for publishing it.
@ s437
Just wanted to say that you got it spot on my friend. Thank you for saving me time in my post
Personally, i find it a bit strange that everyone forgets we are still animals. Not in the wild and savage sense, but in a biological sense. We, unfortunately, are not the extremely special beings we like to think we are. We are the beneficiaries of favored evolution. That being said i think the concept of God and religion becomes quite obvious. Animals fear that which they don’t understand, and since we have been granted this great gift of complex thought it is only logical to presume that we, as a species, would create some sort of buffer between ourselves and our fears. Gods and religions are that buffer. Did no one think it quite strange that as our understanding of the world and of nature progressed, our need for many gods to explain natural phenomena gradually diminished. We went from many different gods that explained every minute detail of our world to just one solitary god that serves to explain the emotional and moral conflicts that we face, and that we have yet to explain. Granted this argument is a weak one, but it is an observation that i had many years ago and still pops into my head on occasion when stories of religions zealotry come on the news.
Anyway, great article Scott
Nicely written post, and omg a bunch of comments. I hope you are still reading them, and if you want, skip straight to the link at the end; its the important part, and I believe you will enjoy it greatly.
I have come to understand (not believe, but truly understand) how I and nature are one and the same, and nature is the only ‘god’ force in existance, and neither I nor anyone or anything else are separate from or different than nature/god/existance; all are one. The separation of ‘god’ into a separate punishing parental invisible ‘person’ is so alien from the truth of perfect love, beauty and acceptance that surrounds us – how could each snow flake be so beautiful if this world were not made of perfect love?
I highly recommend taking a moment to watch this TED Talks video from Jill Bolte Taylor, a lady who had the amazing opportunity to actually experience her complete one-ness with the universe, and can share that experience with others in a way I’ve never felt so powerfully before:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html
I think this post is still going strong because it is one of the few places on the Internet where a real discussion is taking place.
For those that are still reading, please check out this article in Scientific American – it’s great food for thought.
Why People Believe Invisible Agents Control the World – A Skeptic’s take on souls, spirits, ghosts, gods, demons, angels, aliens and other invisible powers that be…
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=skeptic-agenticity
[...] I’ve tried arguing: atheism is not a life philosophy devoid of meaning or intrinsic rewards. It’s simply a different [...]
What kind of a God do you reject? Can you prove, with 100% certainty, that there is no God?
Timothy,
I can’t prove anything with 100% certainty.
-Scott
The reason why he made this post . He said it was for emotional purpouse . It’s not a case of am right ure wrong . We’ve all seen where that thinking leads to . …
You said its not a case of you dont believe it a case of the belief isn’t there. It really helps me to know that no matter what happens god is watching over me and that he wont give me any burden or trials that I
cant handle . A friend gave me this qoute its ” through the difficulties to the stars ” . Keeping that in mind I hope you stay positive and that you find your way to god if not I wish for your peace in this world .
Love your blog and thanks for the great tips for studying and stuff.
Scott,
I respect your views on religion, but I don’t agree with some negatives you have stated. For example, the freedom that comes with religion is just as much as freedom without religion because it enables you to see God’s creations in different perspectives. I believe that all religions have a near-perfect idea on paper, but human nature is what corrupts them. For example, Communism sounds great on paper, but does not work in reality because of human nature. Religion is what got us out of our animalistic nature and refined us. (For some reason your spell-check says I’m spelling animalistic wrong). I think religion was the best thing to happen to us because of its comfort and righteousness. The problem with proving religion is that most of it is truly spiritual. Then again, we can’t prove different dimensions and universes although it is likely they exist. God said our intelligence is too little to understand exactly how he was created and why we exist at all. Personally, I believe that to be true because human intelligence has a limit. The issue is that we can never understand fully why we were created or what the meaning of life is because a question will always follow another question.
An elightening post. I also recommend Toltec Wisdom of don Miguel Ruiz (esp. the audiobook version). Though this work leans more towards a pantheistic view, it isn’t out to inform, but rather to offer self-help through a deeper understanding of our emotions and the universe that we live in.
Most atheists believe in science. But science is just a belief system, so in a sense, it’s just another religion.
I highly disagree when you said that “there is intrinsic purpose in seeking the truth. And that faith or any suspension of the rational mind I possess is an inherent evil towards this goal.”
You see this goal is pointless. We can never rely on our rationale to know the truth, because we rely on our senses to guide our reasoning. And, all of our sensory perceptions are based on the past. The stars we “see” in the night sky, most of them died billions of years ago. The keyboard you’re typing on right now, you touched it how many milliseconds ago it took for the nerve to fire from the tip of your finger to your brain. The thoughts you’re thinking right “now”, you thought it however many nanoseconds ago, etc. Not only that, people (and their reasoning) do change because what we believe now to be the truth, may turn out to be a lie, in the near future.
In many instances, suppressing rationality is the lesser evil. For example, when we’re writing a novel, our rationality presents us with the internal editor, who tries to sabotage our progress. Often times, we find success in doing something counter-intuitive, rather than listening to our thoughts. Also, how do you explain the fact that the people who follow their hearts (where love resides) rather than their brains, are often the people, who get it right. We’re talking Bill Gates (love of computers), Walt Disney (love of animation), J.K. Rowling (love of writing mystery and fantasy novels). Wouldn’t everyone be happier and better off, if they’d shut off their brain once in a while, where thoughts of worry reside? How do you explain the fact that some psychiatric patients get better when they are given a treatment of electric shock to their brain to “fry themselves out of their problem” by resetting and re-aligning everything “up there” in their cranium?
Also, there are certain truths out there, the “unwritten laws of this world”, which the logical mind would never fathom coming up with, because it’s too cowardly to consider abandonning itself to illogic. Two things come to mind:
(1) The arrogant shall fall. The Titanic, anyone? Too big to sink, eh?
(2) One meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it. There was a story a while ago, in my local newspaper of two young girls, who decided to take a taxi home late at night, rather than public transit, because they felt it was the safest way to get home. They died in a fatal accident when another vehicle slammed into the taxi they were riding.
(3) He that seeks, his life shall lose it, and he that loses, his life shall find it. For instance, when you make it a point to go out and meet people to find love, you almost will never find what you’re looking for. It’s only when you stop looking, does love find you, like starting a casual conversation with someone on a subway, only to find out that you have much in common. The phrase, “money comes to you, when you least need it,” illustrates this unwritten law so succinctly.
Just about the only thing that I think you got right in the article is the fact that atheism brings you far greater freedom, because you see, the biggest fear that humans have is NOT the fear of dying, NOT the fear that one day, you will lose everything you have and hold dear to, but rather the fear of living life to the fullest, which is why we would sabotage ourselves, when we’ve finally found the freedom that we are looking for.
Before I ask you this question, let me apologize if you already answered this question in your comments. I understand that Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or all gods. However I don’t recall you saying if you either are skeptical in the existence God or if you believe that such a being doesn’t exist. So are you just skeptical or doubtful or do you believe that such a being (specifically the Judeo-Christian God) doesn’t exist.
God exists…
Here’s actual scientific proof. It’s a little quantum experiment called the double slit experiment. This first video, explained by a cartoony character called Dr. Quantum, gives you the gist of the classic experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
This next series of videos (8 parts total), give you the current update:
Part 1 of 8 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bgnuib0z0vI
The second experiment is a modern twist on the classic experiment shown in the first video. This experiment demonstrates the existence of conscious knowledge of future events in something as simple as an electron and is closely related to the concept of Laplace’s demon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace's_demon
After having watched those videos, if you accept that:
Particles = matter = matterial world = Devil = lack of faith (b/c you had to observe) = can’t tell the future for beans so as to tame Laplace’s demon.
But WaveFunction = immaterial world = God = faith (b/c you trusted, therefore did not have to observe) = more powerful than Devil = CAN tell the future,
it then becomes natural to surmise that when we die, our consciousness dies. We no longer “observe” the world, hence we return to our native wavefunction state (because “observation” collapses wavefunctions turning them into particles, ie. matter), we become one with the Almighty, because he is a wavefunction, and he is more powerful than the Devil, because he knows the future.
99.999% of the universe is space, even at the subatomic level. According to physicist Nassim Haramein, this space is the contractive part of the universe, the opposite of the expansive-electromagnetic-radiating part that we experience as reality.
Haramein goes on to provide proof that in 2012, the year where the Mayan calendar will end, will mark a very “disruptive” phase in our solar system. It is the year when our sun will reverse its magnetic pole giving off some major excess energy in order to restabilize this magnetic flip. He goes on to propose three possibilities (note the word possibility):
A) The excess energy given off might ignite Jupiter to become our second sun.
B) We might experience three days without sunlight as the sun switches poles during the transition.
C) The excess energy might alter our experience of reality and change our DNA. Haramein suggest that the best course of action to take is to mentally prepare ourselves to “not take things personally” and just go with the flow.
For a more detailed explanation, watch Haramein’s video presentations here:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32453
(Scroll down to post #3 in the link).
Additional link to above comment:
If the Nassim Haramein videos are not accessible on Google Video, try the YouTube version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPgII_4ciFU
Scott
Another great post, congratulations! I’m reading it two years after you wrote it but I feel a need to comment. I’m impressed that you think just like me. I’ve been an atheist since I can remeber. Since I was 5 years old and my grandmother wanted to take to me the church, I always said I didn’t want to, I didn’t like it. I don’t despise religions, on the contrary, I think religions are very useful to many people out there who don’t believe in themselves, people who can’t accept the notion that they are responsible for their own lives, and that they are able to change their reality themselves.
Religions are good to many people, they just aren’t good to me, I never needed to beleive in those invisible spirits ruling the world.
I know many people who don’t beleive in god, and those people are conscient that they control their own lives.
Here in Brazil it’s almost impossible to bring up this subject because people feel offended, most of them just don’t accept. Still they feel they have the right to offend others who think differently. I’m a vegetarian too and I suffer with prejudice from people who don’t accept anyone who’s different from them. I just tell them to mind their own business and I also never try to convert anyone, I just like to have my points of view respected, just like they want me to respect their “deities”.
I always say to those who try to convince me of doing anything: “Don’t try changing the world, just change yourself, that’s how I live”.
Regards
Rosália Kogan – São Paulo / Brazil
“Atheism only suggests that death is a current unknown.”
If I was an atheist that thought Jesus most likely was the Son of God, what would that make me?
As a believer that Jesus was the Son of God, I don’t have any problem with atheists. I think that concluding Jesus was likely the Son of God results in an extra reason to be a good person, but obviously is not necessary to know we should be good, loving, and disciplined people.
I’m not sure where all the negativity came from, lol, but I was definitely a product of it. Love, and let discipline and belief guide you, and let those beliefs adapt as we grow.
I hope you change your mind someday. As the Father of your spirit, and the Creator of the Universe, God Loves You! You are his son. You are a benefactor of his Love every single day.
God Bless!
[...] Religion (at all) [...]
Huh: ??
if doesn’t care about Religion ,, then ,, you’re nothing at all
u’re just wasting you time & Life ,,
Let’s make it clear
This Life is simply a Challenge ,, do u know what kind of Challenge ??
Yes ,, A Religion Chellange ,,
i know that there is so much religion ,, and most of there is made by human ,, but of course not all of them
Well ,,
I don’t want to talk to much ,,
just watch this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2Clk5lNUdQ
[...] my past article, Why Atheism, where I explained my lack of religious belief, this article is an explanation not a sales pitch. [...]