Quote: Plordigian@Samius: Sure thing, drop some knowledge on me.
Okay, here's what I got.
First of all, I'd like to clarify that atheism
does not include any certainty of the nonexistence of divinity, even though that's how it's often misinterpreted. Atheism is simply
disbelief in the existence of divinity.
If irrefutable proof of god was shown to me, being a rational person I would change my mind. I'm not being close-minded here.
I just simply don't think anything like that will ever happen. I don't think anything divine exists, and I wholeheartedly believe that the people who believe in the divine (in whatever form it is presented) are believing in a misconception or, depending on the religion, a lie.
Religion is, to me, a social phenomenon. So far we haven't discovered evidence of any species other than humans possessing religious behavior. The idea of divinity is then exclusive to humans, and stems from our way of thinking. Therefore, it can be explained by examining the human mind.
You've probably heard the term "all babies are born atheist"? I'm aware that it's wrong to assume that all sentient life should somehow be innately conscious of a higher force, but the fact is that religion
is learned through social interaction, and it's nature depends on the nature of the social environment.
Example. The Hindi of India truly believe that washing themselves in cow piss will allow them to reach closer to a higher state of existence. To Christians the idea must seem ridiculous, but they believe and embrace the "fact" that a man rose from the dead, and that a talking snake convinced a woman to bite an apple, thus infecting all human beings with an evil worthy of an eternity of torment if you don't have faith in God. Both parties find their own beliefs to be reasonable, because they were brought up to believe in them.
In the same way, if I was to raise a child without having to expose him/her to any outside social influence, that would make me that child's social environment. He/she would learn by my example, and I could make him/her believe anything.
No factual information of any kind is required to establish all these beliefs, just the influence of the social environment. Why should we then even take these beliefs in consideration, when we know the origin of the beliefs, and we know that they contradict what we hold as well established facts?
To me, remaining indecisive about something like this simply because it is
theoretically possible for an airtight argument to be true (like the matrix argument), is like remaining indecisive about whether you believe Santa Claus exists. We know he is made up, and though that doesn't make it impossible for him to exist, it's not a reason for me to take it into consideration. If his existence was proven, however,
then I would have a reason.
Even outside of human religions and gods, it's the whole idea of divinity and the supernatural that I'm against. Even if some powerful being was discovered from the universe, why would it be anything "divine" and not just a powerful being?
After all, nothing is truly inexplicable when confronted with the proper analysis. What makes a divine being divine? What is divinity? No theist has ever given me an answer, though they still worship and accept their own god.
It's a game of ideas, nothing is concrete or proven. It has lead me to believe that the idea of divinity is just a quirk in our way of thinking. That's what I shun the thought of being an agnostic.
In the end I believe that all human beings are rationalists. What varies is the information we have in our heads, and the structure of our brains (literally how we've learned to think).
This is why I'm an atheist.
Here's a couple of good vides to go with this post. You don't have to watch them but they demonstrate what I believe very well.
Gems: 9564
Gems: 2648
Gems: 3565
Gems: 4833
Gems: 5690
Gems: 9352
Gems: 8425
Gems: 6254
Gems: 626
Gems: 9573
Gems: 8660
Gems: 2329
Gems: 1760
Gems: 2409
Gems: 9034
Gems: 6150
Gems: 6710
darkspyro
net