Atheism's Unanswered Questions

[agnostic_pilgrim]

Atheism's Unanswered Questions

The atheistic world view fails to plausibly answer many questions and explain common observations about the universe and human nature. Theism, however, does provide answers and explanations, and so these questions lead us to evidence for the existence of God.

The universe: How did the universe begin? How did life arise from non-living matter? The claims that the universe always existed or had a "natural" cause and that life spontaneously arose are just as extraordinary as the claim that an intelligent being created both the universe and life. If the universe is in its present state because of the Big Bang, what caused the Big Bang, and where did the matter that exploded come from? If the universe has always existed, why is there such a large quantity of mass and energy, not to mention intelligent life?

Science: Science exists because the universe operates in a consistent way and has phenomena that we can describe as "laws," such as the law of gravity. If the universe and/or things in it were formed by chance, why should the behavior of the universe be predictable instead of random?

Nature: Why do people uniformly admire nature? Why do we see so much beauty in it? It's no longer our natural surroundings, for we live in urban areas surrounded by pavement and man-made structures. Why do we prefer nature to what we ourselves have made? Why do we prize window offices and decorate walls with landscapes, instead of being content with our climate-controlled environment?

Psychology: Why do people seek for meaning and purpose in life - why are we not content simply to live in the moment? Why do we keep trying to explain how and why the universe came into existence? Why would evolution have given us this need for a purpose, when the instinct to survive would suffice and when lack of a purpose leads so many into despair and self-destructive behavior?

Religious experience: If there are no gods and nothing spiritual or supernatural exists, how can religious experience be explained, and why do the vast majority of people believe in God and/or spiritual and supernatural things? If religion is a placebo for the weak-minded, why do even intelligent, committed atheists convert - and why do people have a need for religion in the first place?

Morality: Why do people feel guilt? Why are monogamy, altruism and humility regarded as virtues, if morality is the result of evolution?

Love & emotion: From an evolutionary standpoint, emotions (except fear and possibly paternal feelings) are a waste of resources. Other creatures only need instincts to survive; why should we have the capacity to love and feel happiness? More to the point, why should we be able to feel emotions like annoyance, grief and hopelessness, when they only retard our ability to survive and reproduce?

Art & music: Why do we spend so much time and energy in making our surroundings attractive rather than merely functional? Why should we have an appreciation for art and music at all?

Source: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/unansweredq.html

This is a nice topic to talk about. Are these really unanswered questions?

[Jayhawker Soule]

The atheistic world view fails to plausibly answer many questions and explain common observations about the universe and human nature. Theism, however, does provide answers and explanations, and so these questions lead us to evidence for the existence of God.

That is a wonderfully telling statement. Note how it classifies atheism as a "world view", castigates it for a failure to conjure up "plausible" answers, but makes no similar demands of 'plausibility' on theism. Then we are treated with the following remarkable nonsense ...

• "Theism ... does provide answers and explanations, and so [i.e., therefore] these questions lead us to evidence ...

First comes the answer (apparently any answer will do) and then comes the evidence.

How convenient ...

... and how embarrassing that anyone would find this stuff worth disseminating.

[Cathar1950]

The atheistic world view fails to plausibly answer many questions and explain common observations about the universe and human nature. Theism, however, does provide answers and explanations, and so these questions lead us to evidence for the existence of God.

That is a wonderfully telling statement. Note how it classifies atheism as a "world view", castigates it for a failure to conjure up "plausible" answers, but makes no similar demands of 'plausibility' on theism. Then we are treated with the following remarkable nonsense ...

• "Theism ... does provide answers and explanations, and so [i.e., therefore] these questions lead us to evidence ...

First comes the answer (apparently any answer will do) and then comes the evidence.

How convenient ...

... and how embarrassing that anyone would find this stuff worth disseminating.

And how Backwards!
Atheism's Unanswered Questions seems rather ignorant of the many answers provided by studies in many fields. I am not even sure what atheism has to do with it. How is "God did it" an answer to anything?
Roy F. Baumeister in his book "The Cultral Animal: Human Nature, Meaning, and Social Life" is much better at explaining then the theism. It seems the atheist and the theist live in the same universe.

[Cmass]

First comes the answer (apparently any answer will do) and then comes the evidence.

How convenient ...

... and how embarrassing that anyone would find this stuff worth disseminating.

Indeed, it is embarrassing. Or it SHOULD be.
Someone gives you an answer. Then you search for the evidence to back it up. What year is this anyway? 1456?

[HelloDollyLlama]

It is competely fallacious to argue that because science and atheism have not yet answered every single one of man's questions, then the Religion Team gets to claim all that inexplained stuff for themselves.

Atheists and scientists have provided explanations for matter, the universe and man which are accurate, although still incomplete.

Religion has provided explanations which are WRONG, WRONGER, WRONGEST, every single time they come in contact with real science.

This is not like baseball, where all ties go to the runner. Not all unexplained philosophical questions go to Team Jehovah. Their team has failed to offer anything that isn't logically fallacious -- why should they get the benefit of the doubt on anything?

[Zzyzx]

.
Atheism has nothing to do with the questions or the answers.

The ONLY reason religious beliefs or absence of such beliefs enter the questions mentioned is when people propose that they KNOW answers – and invoke the power of their invisible, undetectable "gods" to "answer" questions. There is no evidence that supernatural beings are involved, only conjectures, opinions and ancient tales (that some believe fervently).

Calling upon "gods" to "explain" natural events such as storms, droughts, volcanic eruption, disease or disasters, is a simplistic means of providing "answers" – that has been popular throughout all we know of human history.

"I don't understand so some invisible deity must have done it", is apparently a psychological tendency for the human race. That simple answer does not seek truth, and often opposes valid search for knowledge, but it is the basis of religion and the livelihood of the priest classes.


As humans contemplate nature that we do not fully understand, we can search for answers OR we can make up stories about supernatural beings and causes. Those who prefer made-up stories often resent and resist those who actually search for truthful answers. Those who earn income selling religious services often attempt or use coercion and force against those who, like Galileo, seek truth in spite of religious resistance.

Since organized, commercial religion is a hierarchical structure promoting group thinking, some (many?, most?) members of such organizations apparently believe that "Atheists" must have a hierarchy, a body of beliefs and some type of group-think (because that is their experience). Many seem unable to grasp the concept that NOTHING unifies "atheists" and that the ONLY thing they need have in common is the absence of a belief in "gods".

Notice that we have a user group for "non stamp collectors". The only thing members have in common is that we do not collect stamps. We do not have an ideology, a hierarchy, leaders, a doctrine or a shared attitude. We simply do not collect stamps. Anyone can join. Atheism is exactly the same – no hierarchy, no group think, no belief structure, etc.