Simple answers for simple ideas
I will be posting a Facebook discussion that started out discussing politics and then Samuel changed it to religious overtones. The following is part of that discussion and I continue with a reply dealing with his simplified definitions of Atheistic belief.
Jeff Samuel notice how i said atheist[s] and hot all? i added the S which means 2 or 100 or 3.000 but not all. so dont assume i refered to all atheistic people, (context). as i said before atheists who claim to be atheist are agnostic when confronted. June 1 at 4:25pm
Samuel Dude, this argument is ridiculous. Here, I took a screenshot from the Oxford dictionary website. This is the the definition of atheism. It has nothing to do with evolution. June 1 at 4:47pm
Samuel Here’s more useful information:
June 1 at 4:51pm
Jeff Samuel you lack comprehension. dude June 1 at 5:31pm
Jeff is trying very hard to get his point across (despite misspelling, grammar problems etc., but Samuel wants to leave the impression that his explanations are simple to understand.
Wikipedia explains: Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which, in its most general form, is the belief that at least one deity exists.
Showing contempt prior to a total investigation of the subject and wanting proof beyond all possible doubt is really about trying to exercise our will and desire to ignore the truth and do as we want, answering to no one.
In talking with a young person who claimed to be an Atheist, I found he had no evidence to support his atheism. This is common for most Atheists I have met, but since they are claiming to know that God does not exist, they need to be able to back it up. I like to point out to Atheists that our best minds admit humankind knows far less than ten percent of all knowledge in the universe. Therefore, if people are reasonable, then they should admit that God could exist in the ninety percent we know nothing about. Three times in our conversation, the individual got honest and said, “I just don’t want there to be a God.” To which I replied, “So what? If it’s true, what you want won’t matter.”
I find that Atheists are more inclined toward this facet. Atheists have a pronounced leaning toward scientism, which is the belief that science is the only reliable source of truth. It is entirely understandable, then, that belief in God might look to them like wishful thinking— as though people of faith have let their hearts overpower their heads. Even if they do not use this term, Atheists tend to subscribe to the materialist view of reality, believing God to be a product of the human imagination, which they believe to be a product of material evolution. Theists, on the other hand, believe the reverse— that the material universe was brought into existence by God, who is not material. Both views accept the reality of the physical world, but one sees this as the only reality whereas the other does not.
I have asked several Atheists to read a book by a man named Thomas Nagel, a professor of philosophy at New York University. He is a highly unusual Atheist, the author of a superb, wave-making book titled “Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False”. To this day, I do not know if they have had the courage to do so- nobody has gotten back to discuss it with me. Draw your own conclusions- I have.
As you may have guessed from the title of his book, he is not your typical Atheist. Most significantly, he roundly rejects the simplistic scientism that so many Atheists still cling to. His atheism is heart-driven, and he isn’t afraid to say so:
“I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.”
“My guess is that this cosmic authority problem is not a rare condition and that it is responsible for much of the scientism and reductionism of our time. One of the tendencies it supports is the ludicrous overuse of evolutionary biology to explain everything about life, including everything about the human mind”.
As a first-rate philosopher of the mind, Nagel actually changes the debate with this candid version of atheism. In light of his example, thoughtful Atheists no longer have the luxury of assuming their worldview just works somehow— that dead molecules somehow formed simple life, and that simple life somehow formed us, despite all the apparent difficulties. Nor do they have the luxury of dismissing every argument against atheism on grounds of religious bias. Thoughtful theists, for their part, can no longer assume that atheism necessarily breeds contempt for faith.