Is atheism meaningless?

[FWI]

Christopher Hitchens, an atheist (in his book: God is Not Great pg. 50), stated: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." This seems like a reasonable statement and I agree. So, what is the evidence for atheism having meaning or purpose?

Therefore, if I use Christopher Hitchens' statement as a guide, then at present I must accept that atheism has no significance, unless evidence can be produced to the contrary.

[Tcg]

Christopher Hitchens, an atheist (in his book: God is Not Great pg. 50), stated: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." This seems like a reasonable statement and I agree. So, what is the evidence for atheism having meaning or purpose?

Therefore, if I use Christopher Hitchens' statement as a guide, then at present I must accept that atheism has no significance, unless evidence can be produced to the contrary.

Atheism is one thing only, a lack of believe in god/gods. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for theists to understand.

You however have made a claim, that atheism has no significance. Your claim, your duty to support it.

If and when you can't, your claim can be dismissed without evidence. That's the way it actually works.

[RedEye]

Christopher Hitchens, an atheist (in his book: God is Not Great pg. 50), stated: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." This seems like a reasonable statement and I agree. So, what is the evidence for atheism having meaning or purpose?

Therefore, if I use Christopher Hitchens' statement as a guide, then at present I must accept that atheism has no significance, unless evidence can be produced to the contrary.

The evidence for atheism having meaning or purpose is theism. A-theism is a counter position to theism. If there was no theism then atheism would be without meaning. Therefore atheism will always have meaning and purpose whilst theism exists.

(Btw, atheism is not a positive assertion so your Hitchens quote is misplaced. Atheism does not require evidence. It is simply a lack of belief in god(s). You don't require evidence to not believe in something. That burden falls on those who do believe in that something. You must be thinking of theism which makes a positive assertion - that a god exists - thereby making a claim which requires evidence).

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 1 by FWI]

Let me support the OP by referring people to the following 2 links, giving reasons for why Atheism, as promoted, seems very wrong:
1. The Defences for God, Blogspot, "The Defences for God - How Atheism is Defeated Forever": https://whatiswritten777.blogspot.com/2 ... sm-is.html
2. "The Fantastic Phenomena or of Freak Nature as Accounts of Reality", Facebook: concluding that "That is, so why not God as well, moral sense intact? 100% religious World (by "white-list" religions) in 10, 20 or 50 years or so?"

While I do not see it as wrong per se to simply "believe in no God whatsoever", their human rights (UDHR) respected, of course, there is a problem still and it has to do with possible dishonesty.

There is no superior scientific insight associated with Atheism, quite the opposite.
It may well be that, from a medical perspective, that Atheism and stupidity go hand in hand because of the (deeply or other) negative consequences on the nervous system leading to stupidity because of moral blindness, the lack of Kantian ethical and moral character. I therefore feel that the case of Atheism is dishonestly promoted without Atheists bothering to be honest about the deep problems associated with moral blindness and the lack of ethical and moral character.

Rather than the strive to conceal an agenda for evil, why not just say it as it is, as the OP suggests, Atheism may be empty, falling back on Hedonism and deeply immoral life, often choosing immoral monster-friends rather than friends who can help Atheists back to sanity by best-practice-psychiatry, for example.

You guessed it! I say Atheism is still out of the World, no longer a case for anybody who seeks the intelligent life!

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 4 by Aetixintro]

Please read the responses by Tcg and RedEye.

And when you have finished ...

Read them again.

And when you have done that ...

Read Tcg's signature.

And please do try very hard to comprehend the distinction between believing there are no gods and not believing there are gods.

Many of us find it quite simple.

Others HAVE been known to me personally to deliberately NOT make the distinction.

It would be very helpful if you could have us understand that you understand the distinction.

[Divine Insight]

Christopher Hitchens, an atheist (in his book: God is Not Great pg. 50), stated: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." This seems like a reasonable statement and I agree. So, what is the evidence for atheism having meaning or purpose?

Who has ever claimed that "atheism" has meaning or purpose? Atheism isn't even a philosophy. It's simply the lack of belief in any theism.

There are many different paradigms of theism. They all cannot be true since they make claims that contradict each other. They are obviously nothing more than philosophical guesses often based on cultural mythologies.

The theologies that are based on the Hebrew mythology (i.e. the Bible) have been shown to be false. There is no longer any room for doubt about this. People who continue to cling to those ancient myths are clinging to demonstrably false stories. Their tenacious denials that these fables can be shown to be false does not change the truth that they are indeed demonstrably false.

~~~~~

Is there a God?

Possibly so. Atheism does not say that there cannot be a God. All atheists point out is that man-made theologies can easily be shown to be false. Atheism is simply the position that no current theology is compelling. In fact, most atheists will gladly claim that if compelling evidence could be given for the existence of a God they would accept that evidence. Thus far no such compelling evidence has ever been shown to exist.

Atheism is NOT Secular Materialism. Also Secular Materialism does not claim that there cannot be a God either. All Secular Materialism states is that there is no reason to postulate the existence of such an entity since materialism alone is a sufficient explanation for reality. Secular Materialists do not need to rule out a God. All they need to do is show that materialism is sufficient, and thus far they have done that. Far more importantly theist have produced absolutely no evidence to show that anything further is required in spite of their failed arguments to the contrary.

Any theist who is engaged in a war between theism and atheism has already displayed an extreme lack of knowledge of both of these schools of thought. They neither understand atheism nor theism. And they no doubt do not understand Secular Materialism either.

[Elijah John]

It may well be that, from a medical perspective, that Atheism and stupidity go hand in hand because of the (deeply or other) negative consequences on the nervous system leading to stupidity because of moral blindness, the lack of Kantian ethical and moral character. I therefore feel that the case of Atheism is dishonestly promoted without Atheists bothering to be honest about the deep problems associated with moral blindness and the lack of ethical and moral character.

Rather than the strive to conceal an agenda for evil, why not just say it as it is, as the OP suggests, Atheism may be empty, falling back on Hedonism and deeply immoral life, often choosing immoral monster-friends rather than friends who can help Atheists back to sanity by best-practice-psychiatry, for example.

:

Moderator Final Warning

Do not state that atheists are stupid, dishonest, or morally blind. Do not even insinuate these things. If you want to stay with us, it is imperative that you find a more civil way to engage with unbelievers.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[FWI]

[Replying to post 2 by Tcg]

Atheism is one thing only, a lack of believe in god/gods.

This "belief" is pretty universal among atheists and is a "claim," which entails much more, than just one thing. Since, I believe in only one true God, your premise suggests that I can stop there and ignore all other aspects of my belief, such as morals, which come because of my belief in God. So, if your lack of belief in God/gods causes you to have a certain moral outlook. Then, of course this is an "additional thing" related to your belief. And, as we explore this concept further, the list can only grow. Hence, the possibility that there are "many" other things included in your lack of belief in God/gods is extremely high.

Therefore, since you claimed that atheism is a single belief, then it is your duty to support it or it can be dismissed. As far as, my claim, you have already dismissed it…

On a lighter note, I would like to acknowledge your "civility" in stating my true religious belief, which is related to theism.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 2 by Tcg]

Atheism is one thing only, a lack of believe in god/gods.

Therefore, since you claimed that atheism is a single belief...

I did nothing of the kind. In fact, I claimed the exact opposite.

If you expect to have a true exchange, you should address what I actually said, not your misrepresentation of what I said.

If you are still confused about atheism, check my signature below. It couldn't possibly be any clearer.

[EPH2:8]

[Replying to post 2 by Tcg]

Atheism is one thing only, a lack of believe in god/gods.

Therefore, since you claimed that atheism is a single belief...

I did nothing of the kind. In fact, I claimed the exact opposite.

So atheism does make a claim?