Arguments For Strong Atheism?
- Thread starter LaoTzu
- Start date
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
Well, perhaps we could start by pointing to your comments as evidence against Intelligent Design.
If you rely on the a priori, you are forced to acknowledge that you cannot disprove God(s). But you must also acknowlede that
- The number of logically possible absurdities that, similarly, cannot be disproved is unbounded, and
- there exists no viable methodology/protocol for selecting some subset of the logically possible and rejecting others.
- Belief in God(s) is unwarranted.
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
No - I don't even expect him to understand what he's written.Originally posted by Vienna
Hello RD,
You don't honestly expect whatsup to understand what you have just written do you?
All gods are imaginary, mythological-beings.
Proof of their non-actuality is between our ears also.
Proof of their non-actuality is between our ears also.
LaoTzu
I don't quite understand the distinction between strong atheism
and weak atheism. Would you mind providing a few more
exemplifications of the differences?
WHATSUPYALL, I liked your old name 'MusleMan' better. It was
less gay.
I don't quite understand the distinction between strong atheism
and weak atheism. Would you mind providing a few more
exemplifications of the differences?
WHATSUPYALL, I liked your old name 'MusleMan' better. It was
less gay.
Crunchy,
Strong: is a belief.
Weak: is an absence of a belief.
Claimant: I believe green flying elephants exist.
Strong: I believe green flying elephants do not exist.
Weak: I have no reason to believe that green flying elephants exist.
Substitute GFE with any of your favorite fantasies, e.g. leprechauns, gods, fairies, unicorns, souls, ghosts, etc.
OK.
Strong: is a belief.
Weak: is an absence of a belief.
Claimant: I believe green flying elephants exist.
Strong: I believe green flying elephants do not exist.
Weak: I have no reason to believe that green flying elephants exist.
Substitute GFE with any of your favorite fantasies, e.g. leprechauns, gods, fairies, unicorns, souls, ghosts, etc.
Cris
Hi, what definition of the word 'belief' are we using here? The
traditional religious 'acceptance without proof', or the less
common variety 'acceptance based on existing factual data'?
Hi, what definition of the word 'belief' are we using here? The
traditional religious 'acceptance without proof', or the less
common variety 'acceptance based on existing factual data'?
Crunchy,
The strong position would still require evidential justification for it to be rational, but if a strong atheist has no such support then that position as well as the theist position would be equally irrational.
The weak position can be as simple as not finding the proposed claims and claimed evidence as convincing and decides to withhold belief indefinitely.
The basis for the belief is not important regarding the definitions.
The strong position would still require evidential justification for it to be rational, but if a strong atheist has no such support then that position as well as the theist position would be equally irrational.
The weak position can be as simple as not finding the proposed claims and claimed evidence as convincing and decides to withhold belief indefinitely.
Instead I would say:
Theistic : I believe in a model that states that an independant force called god is responsible for the creation of the universe.
Strong Atheistic: I don't believe in that model, and I will not believe in it regardless of the proofs brought, and I have no alternative model to justify my creation.
Weak Atheistic: I have no reason to believe in the Theistic model unless it could be solved with a great deal of certainty.
LucidDreamer
Registered Senior Member
Not exactly.
Atheism / Theism deal with belief. Gnosticism / Agnosticism deal with knowledge.
Theists believe that god exists.
Atheists either believe that there is no god or do not believe in god, take your pick.
Gnostics claim to have knowledge about the existence of god.
Agnostics claim to have no knowledge about the existence of god.
A strong theist (Gnostic Theist) is one who believes in god AND claims to know that there is a god.
A weak theist (Agnostic Theist) is one who believes in god BUT does not claim knowledge that there is a god.
A strong atheist (Gnostic Atheist) is one who does not believe in god AND claims to know that there is no god.
A weak atheist (Agnostic Atheist) is one who does not believe in god BUT does not claim knowledge that there is no god.
It is important to note that atheism and agnosticism are separate schools of thought and that agnosticism alone is not an alternative to atheism.
Last edited:
Cris
So if I am understanding correctly:
Strong Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack
of empirical fact supporting it.
Weak Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' because it
'feels' illogical?
?
So if I am understanding correctly:
Strong Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack
of empirical fact supporting it.
Weak Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' because it
'feels' illogical?
?
Creationists me thinks.. Sorry if someone already answered this.
Crunchy,
Strong Atheism is more about rejecting a god because there are arguments that show such a god does not exist. E.g. presence of evil and omni-benevolence is a possible paradox, similarly free will and omniscience is another possible paradox. If these are true paradoxes then it would mean that the god with those properties could not exist and therefore does not exist.
Weak atheism is a rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack
of empirical fact supporting it.
But you should consider LucidDreamers points as well. They could be tightened up somewhat. The problem with those definitions is that not many people follow them or understand them.
Not quite.
Strong Atheism is more about rejecting a god because there are arguments that show such a god does not exist. E.g. presence of evil and omni-benevolence is a possible paradox, similarly free will and omniscience is another possible paradox. If these are true paradoxes then it would mean that the god with those properties could not exist and therefore does not exist.
Weak atheism is a rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack
of empirical fact supporting it.
But you should consider LucidDreamers points as well. They could be tightened up somewhat. The problem with those definitions is that not many people follow them or understand them.
hmmm... I am still not sure I am seeing this.
Lucid dreamer and yourself (Chris) seem to have differences
in your definitions and my confusion on this does not seem to be
improving. Ok... redefinition:
Strong Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack of
empirical fact supporting it AND assertion that
the statement "there is no 'God'" is true based
on existing empirical facts and logic applied to
said facts and / or data that 'believers' qualify
as 'proof' that 'God' exists.
Weak Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack
of empirical fact supporting it WITHOUT any
assertion that the statement "there is no 'God'"
is true.
Is this correct?
Lucid dreamer and yourself (Chris) seem to have differences
in your definitions and my confusion on this does not seem to be
improving. Ok... redefinition:
Strong Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack of
empirical fact supporting it AND assertion that
the statement "there is no 'God'" is true based
on existing empirical facts and logic applied to
said facts and / or data that 'believers' qualify
as 'proof' that 'God' exists.
Weak Atheism = rejection of the concept of 'God' due to lack
of empirical fact supporting it WITHOUT any
assertion that the statement "there is no 'God'"
is true.
Is this correct?
crunchy,
Yep thats pretty much it.
Strong atheist: There is no god.
Weak atheist: I do not have belief in a god.
See the difference?
More info
As for an argument for strong atheism...you would have to define 'god' first. Arguments can be made against such gods as zeus or jesus. But an argument against a more nebulous god as in sufism would be much harder. An argument against the god of pantheism would be hard indeed!
Yep thats pretty much it.
Strong atheist: There is no god.
Weak atheist: I do not have belief in a god.
See the difference?
More info
As for an argument for strong atheism...you would have to define 'god' first. Arguments can be made against such gods as zeus or jesus. But an argument against a more nebulous god as in sufism would be much harder. An argument against the god of pantheism would be hard indeed!
Crunchy,
So now you have thought about it here is a weblink that might help further.
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html
And an extract -
Atheism is characterized by an absence of belief in the existence of gods. This absence of belief generally comes about either through deliberate choice, or from an inherent inability to believe religious teachings which seem literally incredible. It is not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.
Some atheists go beyond a mere absence of belief in gods: they actively believe that particular gods, or all gods, do not exist. Just lacking belief in Gods is often referred to as the "weak atheist" position; whereas believing that gods do not (or cannot) exist is known as "strong atheism".
Regarding people who have never been exposed to the concept of 'god': Whether they are 'atheists' or not is a matter of debate. Since you're unlikely to meet anyone who has never encountered religion, it's not a very important debate...
It is important, however, to note the difference between the strong and weak atheist positions. "Weak atheism" is simple scepticism; disbelief in the existence of God. "Strong atheism" is an explicitly held belief that God does not exist. Please do not fall into the trap of assuming that all atheists are "strong atheists". There is a qualitative difference in the "strong" and "weak" positions; it's not just a matter of degree.
Some atheists believe in the non-existence of all Gods; others limit their atheism to specific Gods, such as the Christian God, rather than making flat-out denials.
"But isn't disbelieving in God the same thing as believing he doesn't exist?"
Definitely not. Disbelief in a proposition means that one does not believe it to be true.
Not believing that something is true is not equivalent to believing that it is false; one may simply have no idea whether it is true or not.
So now you have thought about it here is a weblink that might help further.
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html
And an extract -
Atheism is characterized by an absence of belief in the existence of gods. This absence of belief generally comes about either through deliberate choice, or from an inherent inability to believe religious teachings which seem literally incredible. It is not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.
Some atheists go beyond a mere absence of belief in gods: they actively believe that particular gods, or all gods, do not exist. Just lacking belief in Gods is often referred to as the "weak atheist" position; whereas believing that gods do not (or cannot) exist is known as "strong atheism".
Regarding people who have never been exposed to the concept of 'god': Whether they are 'atheists' or not is a matter of debate. Since you're unlikely to meet anyone who has never encountered religion, it's not a very important debate...
It is important, however, to note the difference between the strong and weak atheist positions. "Weak atheism" is simple scepticism; disbelief in the existence of God. "Strong atheism" is an explicitly held belief that God does not exist. Please do not fall into the trap of assuming that all atheists are "strong atheists". There is a qualitative difference in the "strong" and "weak" positions; it's not just a matter of degree.
Some atheists believe in the non-existence of all Gods; others limit their atheism to specific Gods, such as the Christian God, rather than making flat-out denials.
"But isn't disbelieving in God the same thing as believing he doesn't exist?"
Definitely not. Disbelief in a proposition means that one does not believe it to be true.
Not believing that something is true is not equivalent to believing that it is false; one may simply have no idea whether it is true or not.
LucidDreamer
Registered Senior Member
The strong atheist says: “I know that there is no god, therefore I do not believe.” His knowledge implies certainty.
The weak atheist says: “I have no knowledge regarding the existence of god, therefore I do not believe.” Without knowledge, he cannot be certain of his conviction. He is suspending his belief in the existence of god given his lack of knowledge.
The weak atheist says: “I have no knowledge regarding the existence of god, therefore I do not believe.” Without knowledge, he cannot be certain of his conviction. He is suspending his belief in the existence of god given his lack of knowledge.