Atheists -what makes you so sure?

[OMG12]

I often wonder what makes atheists so sure that there isn’t a god. I’m not talking a particular iteration of the Divine, eg it’s easy to say I can’t believe there is a God because of childhood cancer, but that is predicated on the concept of a God who is only good and considers childhood cancer as bad and further is capable and willing to stop all bad things. I’m talking gods not religions here which a very different things.

Most cultures throughout time have have gods so it’s somewhat of an anomaly to not believe. I just wonder why people don’t believe. (And can we try and keep this a decent debate rather than any of the sky fairy shit those with an inability to debate a point beyond regurgitated social media soundbites seem limited to)

I would not say “I believe dragons don’t exist”. That sounds really odd, doesn’t it? I would say “I do not believe dragons exist”.

It may be semantics, but atheism (and even that word makes it sound like a thing, rather than not-a-thing) is often made out to be equivalent to having a religion or faith, and it just isn’t.

Interestingly the Bible has many similar sentiments- as do many other religions regarding returning to the universe eg

Genesis 3:19: “By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

But most faiths now have a belief in at least two levels of existence (often intertwined) the body (atoms) and the soul (often seen as part of the higher power) this with similarly be reabsorbed on death. - union )there’s differing opinions as to whether this will happen only on death or is a possible in a life time.

Ecclesiastes 12:7: “And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.”

so really the only difference is whether we only have one dimension of being. Are we just a collection of atoms? Or is there something more? Whatever your belief regarding this all are returning to source.

I think it’s interesting that the Bible often indicates a loss of “self” on death but popular conceptions of the afterlife retain much of say the Egyptian view of effectively continuing life in the afterlife on death, it’s this continuance of self that’s often used as a selling point for religions - the playing on a fear of the unknown by promising business as usual but better (or worse if you’re unlucky) after death. I think this is an important difference between religious adherence and spiritual enlightenment - the clinging to the importance of the individual)arrogance if you like) rather than the realisation that we’re just dust, whether just physical or also spiritual, we’re part of an eternity but we’re not eternal. That’s how I see it anyway

What is the purpose in inventing the idea of 'spiritual dust' ?

Can you explain what you mean?

Very interesting thread, OP.

Surely though, the more pertinent and more interesting still question is “Believer’s, what makes you so sure”? (If I’ve missed that one, apologies in advance).

I would not say “I believe dragons don’t exist”. That sounds really odd, doesn’t it? I would say “I do not believe dragons exist”. It may be semantics...

No it doesn't sound remotely odd to me, and yes it's semantics. You know full well dragons don't exist. Surely you don't really think that choosing to phrase it as 'I don't believe dragons exist' means you are any less sure they don't exist? It's merely a kind of politeness, in order to sound less sure of yourself.

Hi, I kind of addressed this upthread but it’s probably rather buried.

for me it’s easier to understand a believers perspective than an atheist ( hence the thread).

Speaking personally, although I don’t have a mainstream belief, but why do I believe what I believe, Deep down I just “know” there’s something more, it’s not an intellectual knowledge it permeates every cell of my body, it’s a lens through which I view the world. It’s older and deeper than rational thought, there’s no need for rationality in the realm in which this operates.

in order to explore it I’ve read widely, undertaken rituals and participated in various religions to find what rings true for me.

Could all of this be wrong, of course it could, I’m not arrogant enough to think I have a universally “correct” answer, but, it’s the right answer for me. It obviously might not be right for everyone or even anyone else. But deep down I just know. It’s beyond communication really,

I can see if a person views the scientific methodology as the only way for finding the truth that such explanations won’t stand up to that scrutiny. However, for me it’s largely immaterial, I can see other ways of finding truth that is much more within. As it’s from within o would never expect anyone to share exactly the same perspective,

Hope that makes sense ( even if you fundamentally disagree with what is written)

In other words, OP, it's how you - an intelligent, compassionate human - make sense of an inequitable, arbitrary universe x

"the realisation that we’re just dust, whether just physical or also spiritual"... what is the purpose in this idea of 'spiritual dust' over and beyond physical dust? You have now futher added that you "just 'know' there's more. You are aware that you don't actually know so you have chosen to go along with the fantasy of spiritual dust... why? What purpose does it serve?

Well we could be here all night about the role of imagination. Yes I just know. What purpose does spiritual dust serve, well first of all I assume that you recognise this is an allegory, secondly why do you think it needs to serve any purpose at all? Why cabt it just be?

Or it’s just how the universe is ordered.

Or it’s just how the universe is ordered

The universe is definitely 'ordered' inequitably, yes. It's comforting to know there's a reason for that.

OMG12 · Today 22:30
MrsSkylerWhite · Today 20:32

Very interesting thread, OP.

Surely though, the more pertinent and more interesting still question is “Believer’s, what makes you so sure”? (If I’ve missed that one, apologies in advance).
Hi, I kind of addressed this upthread but it’s probably rather buried.

for me it’s easier to understand a believers perspective than an atheist ( hence the thread).

Speaking personally, although I don’t have a mainstream belief, but why do I believe what I believe, Deep down I just “know” there’s something more, it’s not an intellectual knowledge it permeates every cell of my body, it’s a lens through which I view the world. It’s older and deeper than rational thought, there’s no need for rationality in the realm in which this operates.

in order to explore it I’ve read widely, undertaken rituals and participated in various religions to find what rings true for me.

Could all of this be wrong, of course it could, I’m not arrogant enough to think I have a universally “correct” answer, but, it’s the right answer for me. It obviously might not be right for everyone or even anyone else. But deep down I just know. It’s beyond communication really,

I can see if a person views the scientific methodology as the only way for finding the truth that such explanations won’t stand up to that scrutiny. However, for me it’s largely immaterial, I can see other ways of finding truth that is much more within. As it’s from within o would never expect anyone to share exactly the same perspective,

Hope that makes sense ( even if you fundamentally disagree with what is written)”

I do fundamentally disagree but really do appreciate your thoughtful reply.

It's an idea of the imagination of humans that some people need to go along with without even the reason of religion apparently. Anything 'can just be' in your fantasies of course. But you have said it's a question that is always there for you, your most important question. Why? I don't need your response to that question. You will decide for yourself whether you do.

Religion,creation of false gods and imposition of moral codes are all interrelated. religions create and manufacture false gods as a vehicle for control and submission. most people don’t independently believe in a god in an areligious way eg the link their God to a doctrine,teaching or religion. This notion of God Or higher bring is a hierarchy of control

The creation of gods / spirits may not have begun as a means of control. It's reasonable enough that people with limited scientific capabilities would, in seeking to understand the world, assume that events are put in motion by people much like them but with super-powers.

Most of the great mythologies are full of characters and stories representing human traits, actions and consequences as well. All in all, they provide a set of answers to people's questions "Why?" They attempt to answer "How", too. If global sea serpents, demons or smiting hands don't do it for you, there's a hundred different ways to say gods don't share their trade secrets with puny humans.

That naturally opens the door to priests and shamans, etc, who claim a special relationship with the gods / spirits. They rapidly became the most powerful class in every culture I can think of. They directed war, politics, economics, medicine, engineering, education, the arts, social structures and family life. As soon as humans had religion, no aspect of life was uninvolved with it.

Even after science and philosophy developed as disciplines, they were studied as part of religion. That went on for millennia - separation only began three hundred years ago, less than a tenth of the time religions held absolute sway. It's unsurprising that they're still inextricably linked for so many, and 'feel true' to many more.

I think there's a simple root to this - it pisses off a lot of believers, I'm afraid. Infants perceive their adult caregivers as godlike: they are the source of sustenance, shelter, protection and knowledge. It's hardwired in most young animals that are unable to provide for themselves. My theory is that this psychological 'wiring' never really goes away. We become independent, but carry on feeling like there should be some authority that's got all the answers and will be there for us when we need it. It's an easy space for a priestly class to step into.

Others have pointed out similarities between dogmatic religions and abusive parents. Maybe, like children who must try to get along with their abusers for their own survival, people have long accepted poor treatment 'in the name of god' because 'god' has filled a parent-shaped space in their subconscious mind?

(I could've written that last paragraph better, but hey.)

What makes the order of the universe inequitable?

And that’s the great thing about the universe- the variety of things within it, inc opinions. Thank you though for being respectful of my ponderings

That’s a very interesting perspective. Why ask the question if you don’t want a response? Are you actually asking that question more of yourself than me? That’s up to you to contemplate and decide whether you need to answer though💜💛.

I’m sure that is your experience. Many people who find a higher power away from religion come to experience everything as one, there is no hierarchy within that just different angles looking at the same thing.

Speaking personally, although I don’t have a mainstream belief, but why do I believe what I believe, Deep down I just “know” there’s something more, it’s not an intellectual knowledge it permeates every cell of my body, it’s a lens through which I view the world. It’s older and deeper than rational thought, there’s no need for rationality in the realm in which this operates.

You 'just know'? And yet you've been saying it sounds odd if people know there's no such thing as dragons - you seem to classify that as actually a belief, while being happy to accept that you have some deep knowledge about an unspecified 'more'! What do you mean by it being older and deeper than rational thought?

I think much of what you have written is true regarding religions, you might like to look up animism if you haven’t already regarding some theories regarding primitive beliefs.

As I said I can see what you’re saying regarding a hierarchical religious structure, with certain views on the separate nature and worship of separate entities. However, many people haven’t got that kind of relationship with the divine, none of it is really separate and therefore no hierarchy exists (except maybe within yourself). You could look into hermeticism or “Neoplatonism” or more generally non-dualism (although that is generally framed in eastern philosophy which as a general rule people are less familiar with in the West).

Well I guess that might be me reflecting on the two different definitions or rather basis of knowledge. I’m happy knowledge can exist without rational thought, therefore I can just know something without having to analyse it rationally, it’s something that is just there.

almost without exception people explaining their position regarding atheism have mentioned rationality in one way shape or form as the basis for their position, and I would infer, I think reasonably, although happy to be corrected, from an atheists point of view all knowledge comes from reasoning, and in this day and age most people seem to think reasoning is underpinned by a scientific way of thinking (although we could debate that point). Therefore within that framework of knowledge to say dragons don’t exist cannot be said with any absolute certainty only with a degree of probability based on currently available evidence (or lack thereof).

So in many ways you’re comparing apples and pears. I don’t think atheism is a belief system, if it was then I could understand the certainty aspect of it more. It is a lack of belief surely? I have gathered from this thread that the certainty in some cases comes from a position that the thought doesn’t even arise in many cases so this leads to certainty it’s an unquestioned position. But I still don’t understand how rational thought can lead anyone to anything but agnosticism, even if it on a very broad spectrum.

Older and deeper than rational thought? Because I think it’s a Knowledge embedded into every fibre of the universe.

No I do not think that at all. I am not trying to sound less sure of myself - quite the opposite - and I’m certainly not trying to be polite.

In my lexicon “belief” is a position held by faith, in the absence of or in contradiction of the available evidence.

If I say “I believe there are no gods” that sounds to me considerably less certain, and more like a religion, than “I do not believe there are gods”. The former is active, in the same ball park as religion; the latter is passive, the default human position as someone upthread said.

But I still don’t understand how rational thought can lead anyone to anything but agnosticism, even if it on a very broad spectrum.

Because, simply put, even if unknown, it isn't at all likely from a rational perspective. So we aren't looking at a 50/50 probability split, we're looking more at a 1 in a million chance that that particular highly unlikely theory is true. Which is a figure you may as well round up to saying you are certain and are an atheist.

I find it hard to understand forsaking rationality and saying that doesn't matter in determining whether something is true or not. To me, saying something is irrational is synonymous with saying it's wrong. To be rational is to think about something correctly.