Friday, August 27, 2010

Prove that Atheism is True...


Let's assume for today that I'm having a discussion on theism and atheism with a person of faith. And the statement is made: "Well, can you prove to me that atheism is true?"

To this I typically respond "Of course not, atheism is a logical concept, and thus cannot be proven. However, I do say it's true." (a brief explanation is held in my "Why I'm not religious..." post if this is TL:DR.)

To understand my reasoning, I'll talk a bit about logic.

Logic is best explained, in my opinion, as a conceptual representation of the consistent method of how the universe (and all things in it) acts. That is to say, in our universe, certain things are impossible. A meteor cannot be a meteor and a kitten at the same time and so on.

Let's take a look at the law of excluded middle. The law of excluded middle states that in a question, where there are only two possible outcomes, if you disprove one, the other must be true. This is shown in the following statement "God exists or he does not exist." Because logically something cannot exist and not exist at the same time, there is an excluded middle. You can't sorta exist or sorta not exist.

By this way, Logic is descriptive of the universe. It describes how the universe operates, albeit in small scope. However, these rules are true in all cases.

The true usefullness of logic comes in it's prescriptive power. That is to say, logic is used to direct our thoughts in thinking about certain situations. Using the example above, if God exists and you can prove it, we can disregard the concept of God not existing.

So, where does atheism sit in regards to logic's prescriptive power. Basically it comes down to this. If there is no evidence to support a position it's logically as valid as any other idea that can be envisioned, no matter how ridiculous. The concept of "God created the universe" is on par with "a pink unicorn named phil with a bum leg and a bandaid over one eye created the universe by farting after eating the volcano big box deal from taco bell".

So what you may say. But we come to the law of non-contradiction. That is to say, two conflicting concepts cannot be true at the same time. So, in the above, either God created the universe or Phil did. Both cannot be true. Therefore one must be wrong. And if one can be wrong with the same evidence as the other, both can be wrong. So because of the prescriptive nature of logic, you must discard ideas that have no evidence.

There is no evidence for God. Therefore you must logically discard it. That leaves you with not believing in God, which is atheism. That's why atheism is true.

Sorry about the shorter article, but there's not really much else to say. :)

What are your thoughts?

2 comments:

  1. There's really no evidence to support theism or atheism, making them both illogical.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I do not believe in a God."
    "There is no God."

    For many people these are the same phrase.

    Atheism is simply the position of "I do not believe in a God because there is no evidence to support it's existence." Based on the work above, I'd contend that not accepting things that aren't proven is a logical position.

    Now, there are some atheists who are also Gnostic, which is to say they assert that they have knowledge of God specifically. This is the illogical position. Because it's impossible to prove that God doesn't exist.


    Thanks for the comment! :)

    ReplyDelete