Message from discussion What are New Atheists really saying when they claim "I lack belief in a god."?
Received: by 10.66.75.39 with SMTP id z7mr12644814pav.26.1351668954471;
Wed, 31 Oct 2012 00:35:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Uergil <Uer...@uer.net>
Subject: Re: What are New Atheists really saying when they claim "I lack belief in a god."?
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 01:35:53 -0600
In article <k6qgug$c8...@dont-email.me>,
Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
> The statement "I lack belief in a god" is a common position of atheists.
> In discussions with them, they tell me they lack belief in God the way
> they lack belief in invisible pink unicorns. In other words, they have
> no position, take no intellectual action, and have no belief or unbelief
> on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue. Though this
> may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced
> to an idea, you cannot stay neutral about it. You invariably make a
> judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can
> brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject
> it, or do something in between. But you cannot return to a lack of
> belief position, if lack of belief is defined as a non-intellectual
> commitment or non-action concerning belief.
Not so. I have no more certainty about the existence of gods than about
the reality of sasquatches or yetis.
> In my opinion, lack of belief is really an attempt by atheists to avoid
> facing and defending the problems in their atheistic position.
Only those who claim certainty have positions to defend
> You see,
> if they say they have no position by saying they lack belief, then their
> position is not open to attack and examination, and they can quietly
> remain atheists.
And you find it unfair that you have nothing to attack?
> The problem for atheists, however, is that atheism is coming under more
> serious attack by Christians and others who recognize its problems and
> are exposing them. Without a doubt, there are far more people in the
> world who believe in God (or a god) than don't, and more and more
> Christians are tackling atheism as an untenable position.
That you claim it to be untenable does not make it untenable any more
that your claiming the existence of a god proves that existence.
Those who claim certainty may properly be held responsible for
justifying that certainty.
But those who claim uncertainty can only be overcome by justifying some
sort of certainty, which you theists cannot do, at least not by way of
any objective physical evidences of godly existence.
> If the
> majority believe, that doesn't make it right; but the increase in
> examination of atheism has made it more difficult for atheists to defend
> their position.
The atheist "position" is merely that theists (and anti-theists for that
matter) have not made their case.
> This also explains why atheists, it seems, are becoming
> more aggressive in their attacks on theism in its different forms.
Atheists defend themselves when attacked. That theists regard such
defence as threatening shows much more about theists anxiety than theist
One notes, for example, that your posting is solely posted to
alt.atheism, and not to any theistic NG whatsoever so is more of an
attack on atheism than a defence of theism.
> is an intellectual battle being waged, and both defensive and offensive
> measures are being taken on both sides. In the end, the truth will be
> known and atheism will become extinct.
Atheism will persist until such time, if ever, when theists can produce
objective physical evidence that at least one of their gods exists.
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less
remote from the- truth who believes nothing than
he who believes what is wrong.