Why I'm an atheist.

gcomeau

Member
Aug 31, 2009
208
23
16
Fremont, CA
For anyone who may be interested for some reason...

Firs of all, to answer a question asked by another thread here, no it was not a "handed down" thing. My parents weren't terribly observant religious practitioners but they believe in God, or at least they did last I checked. The bottom line is I'm an atheist because I've never been given any reason to be anything else.

Growing up I bought into the usual pleasant fictions we sell young children. Tooth fairy... Easter bunny... Santa Clause. They were happy things to believe existed. Made the world a more magical place you know? But, as you grow older and start to develop slightly more refined critical thinking skills the puzzle pieces start assembling themselves and those beliefs go away. It's just silly to think some magic fairy is sneaking into your room at night to pay you for old teeth. And the bearded guy with the flying reindeer needs to be breaking the light speed barrier to get all those deliveries done in one night, not to mention the payload his sleigh needs to carry. And come to think of it that time you thought you saw him he looked an awful lot like dad with lots of facial hair... and you know about fake beards now.

So, even though it's nice to think these things exist, you leave them behind and face reality.

Or at least, that's what I thought the idea was supposed to be.

Now like I said... my parents weren't terribly religiously observant. The concept of god played very little actual role in my life so I never gave it much thought until I was older. I mean, I was aware of the concept but it was always something going on on the periphery.

But, once I got to around 12 or 13 I think I started taking more notice of it and it sunk in that people were actually serious about this. Not just kids... adults. And lots of them. And frankly the only reaction I had to that was that people were trying to tell me there was this magical being who could supposedly see me when I'm sleeping, knows when I'm awake, knows if I've been bad or good so I should be good for goodness sake... and I'd already ridden that ride thank you very much. And while it was a fun ride, well, fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice...

(Spare me the exclamations that I was giving it insufficiently rigorous theological analysis. 12 or 13 remember?)

Anyway, basically I wasn't indoctrinated with this belief when I was very young. No regular visits to church, no Sunday school bible study, etc... so I didn't currently possess it. Which means in order to adopt it I was going to have to be given a reason to believe it. And it was going to have to be a lot better than "just believe it, god totally exists". That one had already been proven to me to be less than reliable.

And people kept coming up really, really short on the "reasons to believe it" front.

Early attempts to get me to accept this idea, once people around me started realizing I didn't already, tended to center around three central themes.

1. But you'll go to hell!!!!

2. Where do you THINK all this stuff came from???

3. EVERYONE believes in God! You think you know better than EVERYONE?

All three of which I found, to be blunt, pure idiocy.

People telling you their magical superbeing is going to condemn you to a nasty fate if you don't believe in it lacks intimidation power considering you... you know... don't believe in it. I was about as worried by pronouncements I would end up in hell as I would have been by ominous warnings that the troll under the bridge was going to leap out and eat me on my way to school if I didn't walk across really quietly so it didn't hear me.

As for the "where did this stuff come from then" crowd... they weren't presenting me with any actual answers to their question. "We don't know, therefore it was obviously magic... duh" lacks any explanatory power whatsoever. And I was considerably more interested in finding real answers to those questions than just pretending I knew the answer because I'd slapped a name on some totally inexplicable supposed "cause" that didn't explain a single thing. It's all well and good to say "God did it" but what the hell does that mean? HOW did he do it? WHY did he do it? What processes were utilized? What does this tell us about future behaviors of the system?

Blank stares were generally the only responses to any of these questions. I quickly realized that most religious people I was conversing with didn't think anything beyond the three words "God did it" were actually required to understand how the entire universe took on its present form even if those three words gave them exactly zero knowledge of anything involved. They had slapped a name on a state of total ignorance, decided that naming it and explaining it were the same thing therefore mystery solved, and were content.

And as for the "Everyone belives it" folks. They did make me think twice for a while. A short while. After all, if everyone beliveved it there must be SOME reason I was missing? Except I quickly realized everyone most certainly didn't believe "in God". They believed in a thousand different sometimes totally mutually exclusive concepts that they all just slapped the same label on. One minute they might be telling me "everyone" believes god exists but 5 minutes later the same person is arguing that most of the planet doesn't know what they're talking about because they obviously believe in the wrong damn version. So everyone CAN be wrong as long as it's the "everyone" that disagrees with them. In fact, considering the different competing claims on the subject not only could the vast majority of the world be wrong, it almost had to be. They sure as heck couldn't all be right.

In short, religious people around me were not exactly covering themselves in glory when these discussions occured. That state of affairs continued until I was about 20, ran across some online discussion forums, and discovered that the internet was more than just an e-mail and porn delivery system.

While online discussions of religious matters still tended to be dominated by, to put it bluntly, the same idiots I had already been dealing with before... I began encountering people who believed in God and actually appeared to have given the matter a respectable amount of thought. Which in turn kicked my brain into higher gear on the subject (It's difficult to take a subject too seriously when the people arguing in favor of it are of the caliber previously described).

One of the people who rose above that crowd was an evolutionary biologist I encountered who spent a lot of his time laying the smackdown on creationists. Had no patience for these people, considered them reality denying morons, but was a conscientous practicing Catholic and believed god certainly existed. That intrigued me. So I started trying to figure out why. And eventually, a few things became clear. The man had a firm grasp of scientific principles. Completely understood the importance of objective investigation and observation to reach conclusions. Knew that unfalsifiable appeals to supernatural mechanisms to explain something just because you don't undertand how it happened was a bogus approach.

And deliberately elected not to apply those rules when it came to god existing.

Knew he did it too. Simply declared that god's existence was a "special case", the same rules didn't apply, and that was that. He chose to live his life believing god existed because he wanted to and if everything he knew about legitimate ways to evaluate knowledge of the world around him didn't match up with that belief then he was just going to ignore them because hanging on to that belief was more important to him personally.

I could understand it. I was sypmathetic to it. I was also incredibly dissapointed. He had made a decision to live in a state of total cognitive dissonance and abject hypocrisy because it made him feel better to hold onto this belief.

In the meantime I was also interacting with other more intellectually engaged theists of various stripes, and I was beginning to pick up on a pattern. There were in depth arguments about first causes and discussions of the proper manner in which to interpret the philosophical teachings of the bible and al manner of other attempts to rationalize belief but if you talked to them long enough it would always come around to one thing eventually.

They were all afraid of living in a world where god didn't exist.

It scared them. Thinking about lost loved ones never ever being seen again saddened them. Thinking there was no ultimate benevolent guiding purpose to the universe upset them. And mostly, they were afraid of dying and not having anything on the far side but oblivion. Just being... gone. Over. No more you. Terrifying. And god is presented like the world's biggest life preserver that can rescue you from that fate.

And this pattern held with the people whose opinions on the matter of god's existence I held worthy of considerably less respect when I went back and looked at their patterns of arguments. And over the years I've seen that pattern hold up as I watch these discussions play out. Ultimately, it's been my perception that people don't believe in god because they have a good reason to think he DOES exist. I have yet to encounter anyone who could provide me with one of those I found even marginally convincing, although they insist THEY find them convincing.

They believe in god because they have good reasons to WANT god to exist.

And that doesn't cut it with me. Wanting doesn't make it real. So, an atheist I remain.
 
Last edited:
Well, apparently my little story has failed to attract any interest in discussion...

Maybe if I changed it to a couple line entry that said something intentionally derogatory and provocative I could generate more traffic... hmmm...
 
Well, apparently my little story has failed to attract any interest in discussion...

Maybe if I changed it to a couple line entry that said something intentionally derogatory and provocative I could generate more traffic... hmmm...
I guess I am wondering what you are hoping to see.

My view in general: More power to you. More power to anyone who wants to believe (or not to believe) as they wish with respect to some diety. More power to me for being Roman Catholic (tres causual). But, God help (;)) anyone who wants to legislate any religion (or any lack of religion) into my and my neighbors' lives; they will hear my voice. Otherwise, you go girl (guy)!

One of my common observations of some atheists ( stressing 'some' and it is just an observation, not a judgment): I see rhetoric to marginalize those who believe. Do you (general you) need to convince yourself that believers are stupid? If they believe, it is no skin off of your (general you) nose. So what? Yes, some believers preach too much - just walk away, change the channel, plug your ears or think of sex while they ramble on if you are captive audience, etc.. Who cares if they think you will go to a place in which you (general you) don't believe? Bottom line: Nice to know, I guess, but still, 'so what'? It's almost as if some atheists feel a need to be witnessing about their lack of belief and I don't know why just as I don't really get into the witnessing thang meself.

But sure enough, there will probably be someone who will eventually tell you (general you) that you will go to Hell, that you are a sinner, that you are doomed, etc. - whatever they tend to say. And that will give you (general you) something to argue about and more reasons not to believe.
 
Last edited:
it's interesting, but why would i want to debate what you believe or don't believe?

Did I wander into the wrong section of the boards or something? This is the religion forum right?

yes, it is.

as i said, your post is interesting, but i have no desire to debate/criticize/castigate religion with anyone, not just you. i didn't mean to offend you.
 
As the story goes 33 1/3 of the angels though God was a prick and I have never been one to run with the mainstream sheeple.:cool:

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO But he loves you.:confused:
Tell that to the babies the story tells about that were in Sodom, Gomorrah or whose daddy didn't have a yacht.:cuckoo:

Idiots............
 
it's interesting, but why would i want to debate what you believe or don't believe?

Did I wander into the wrong section of the boards or something? This is the religion forum right?

Yep.. But like he said, why would you want to debate your own belief, unless you're not secure in it? With few exceptions, MOST people are content to live and let live here...

Had you come in with both guns drawn, you'd likely have been toasted quicker than a marshmallow in a bonfire. Most likely, you wouldn't have liked that outcome EITHER.
 
as i said, your post is interesting, but i have no desire to debate/criticize/castigate religion with anyone, not just you. i didn't mean to offend you.

Wasn't even a little offended, just confused why someone uninterested in debating what people do and don't believe was posting in the forum entirely dedicated to doing that.

Si modo: Here's the thing. Reality is a certain way. And I think it's important people recognize that so their decisions are based on fact instead of fiction. I don't think I've got a personal hold on the absolute truth of existence, it's completely possible I'm totally wrong about reality and someone else has it right. But I do have an interest, when claims are made about the world around us that are wildly contradictory to anything I've ever observed to be true, to exploring the source of the contradiction and resolving it. In this way we advance knowledge and common understanding. So I don't really agree so much with the "whatever you want to believe" camp.

Now that really applies to pretty much everything, not just religion. But religion has a special place in my pet peeve list because of a couple aspects of it. And first and foremost is this kind of general immunity to objective inquiry a great many people seem to think it enjoys. If anyone was wandering around making wild largely unsupported claims about things happening in pretty much any other context nobody would think twice about the appropriateness of debunking those claims for no other reason than that people should have an interest in the truth. But slap the label "their religious belief" on those claims? All of a sudden half the planet reacts like that debunking is a hostile anti-social act or something.

And even for those who don't react that way there's the fallback positions. "Faith" being used as a catch all "get out of dealing with evidence free" card. And the appeal to the supernatural to declare any and all attempts to rationally analyze the content of their claims to be defeated by some kind of magical circumvention of the observed scientific laws that govern reality the rest of the time.

So, what I was hoping for was a little discussion about how these attitudes develop by kicking things off with a description of how I got to where I am.
 
Last edited:
Interesting story. You have the right to believe what you wish. My own experience with God has left me no doubt of His existence. Too many prayers have been answered to deny that. Too many miracles seen.
 
Interesting story. You have the right to believe what you wish. My own experience with God has left me no doubt of His existence. Too many prayers have been answered to deny that. Too many miracles seen.

Would you care to describe one of these answered prayers or miracles?
 
as i said, your post is interesting, but i have no desire to debate/criticize/castigate religion with anyone, not just you. i didn't mean to offend you.

Wasn't even a little offended, just confused why someone uninterested in debating what people do and don't believe was posting in the forum entirely dedicated to doing that.

Si modo: Here's the thing. Reality is a certain way. And I think it's important people recognize that so their decisions are based on fact instead of fiction. I don't think I've got a personal hold on the absolute truth of existence, it's completely possible I'm totally wrong about reality and someone else has it right. But I do have an interest, when claims are made about the world around us that are wildly contradictory to anything I've ever observed to be true, to exploring the source of the contradiction and resolving it. In this way we advance knowledge and common understanding. So I don't really agree so much with the "whatever you want to believe" camp.

Now that really applies to pretty much everything, not just religion. But religion has a special place in my pet peeve list because of a couple aspects of it. And first and foremost is this kind of general immunity to objective inquiry a great many people seem to think it enjoys. If anyone was wandering around making wild largely unsupported claims about things happening in pretty much any other context nobody would think twice about the appropriateness of debunking those claims for no other reason than that people should have an interest in the truth. But slap the label "their religious belief" on those claims? All of a sudden half the planet reacts like that debunking is a hostile anti-social act or something.

And even for those who don't react that way there's the fallback positions. "Faith" being used as a catch all "get out of dealing with evidence free" card. And the appeal to the supernatural to declare any and all attempts to rationally analyze the content of their claims to be defeated by some kind of magical circumvention of the observed scientific laws that govern reality the rest of the time.

So, what I was hoping for was a little discussion about how these attitudes develop by kicking things off with a description of how I got to where I am.

K. Thanks for telling me where you want this to go.

Let me tell you a bit about how I view belief. I don't know if this is a common trait of many, but for me I compartmentalize faith from 'reality' in my life. I have to as my profession is in the sciences. As faith is by definition, a belief in something that has no supporting data, there is little logical about it. In the sciences, it's all about logic. So, it would be quite silly of me to try to apply logic to faith. It would be like trying to mate a zebra with a hubcap.

I don't mix the real world events with my beliefs in something supernatural, either. That makes little sense to me, too. I do know that some believers do - 'It's God's plan', for example. That's fine for them if it helps them deal with real world issues that are too complex at the moment. Personally, whenever I come across something so complex in the real world that makes little sense, I seek more information in the hope that I can better understand it. That would be a scientist thing.

So, I compartmentalize and because I do, I find your last statement in the first paragraph - "So I don't really agree so much with the "whatever you want to believe" camp" - nonsensical to me. In fact, it looks like a non sequitur. If that - being cool with someone having their views in the faith department - makes this believer stupid or out of touch with reality to some, oh well. I see little constructive to that sort of view, but some do have it.
 
Last edited:
gcomeau:

I'm with ya. Just read the first line of my sig.

In addition to your reasoning, I would add that this desire to believe is so deep-set that those who believe are not even aware of it. We're talking subconcious, id, ego, superego stuff here. Its a psychological defense, and to be aware of it as such would undermine or even nullify it as a defense.

To try and get someone to explain the practical and inherent relevance and importance of faith is an exercise in futility. To get them to admit they believe in God simply because they want to, is next to impossible. One would have to figure out a way to persuade a believer to want to admit that they believe because they want to more than they actually want to believe.

Its the fear of death and/or, maybe even more terrifying, the fear of meaninglessness.
 
gcomeau:

I'm with ya. Just read the first line of my sig.

In addition to your reasoning, I would add that this desire to believe is so deep-set that those who believe are not even aware of it. We're talking subconcious, id, ego, superego stuff here. Its a psychological defense, and to be aware of it as such would undermine or even nullify it as a defense.

To try and get someone to explain the practical and inherent relevance and importance of faith is an exercise in futility. To get them to admit they believe in God simply because they want to, is next to impossible. One would have to figure out a way to persuade a believer to want to admit that they believe because they want to more than they actually want to believe.

Its the fear of death and/or, maybe even more terrifying, the fear of meaninglessness.
Or maybe a believer actually does say it. I believe because I make a choice to believe. I adore choice. God bless America. ;)
 
Last edited:
K. Thanks for telling me where you want this to go.

Let me tell you a bit about how I view belief. I don't know if this is a common trait of many, but for me I compartmentalize faith from 'reality' in my life. I have to as my profession is in the sciences. As faith is by definition, a belief in something that has no supporting data, there is little logical about it. In the sciences, it's all about logic. So, it would be quite silly of me to try to apply logic to faith. It would be like trying to mate a zebra with a hubcap.

Now see, that is an almost perfect match for what that evolutionary biologist in my OP does. And here's what gets me...why does faith get this special pass on logic?

It might prove useful for you to read my take on "faith" here when answering: http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/86980-on-faith.html ... (which was another post that appeared to generate little interest in discussion. I seem to have a knack)

Now, since you're obviously talking about that fourth type of "faith" here, what is it about having that type of faith that you think is a good thing? I mean yes, I get the appeal of the claims being made. It would be nice IF they were true. But does making yourself feel better just acting like they are while putting yourself into some kind of state of total cognitive denial of any indications to the contrary by using this compartmentalization you're talking about really strike you as a very good idea? And of so.. why? Is it just the "it makes me feel better" thing or is there some other reasons you find that to be something desireable for you to do?
 
K. Thanks for telling me where you want this to go.

Let me tell you a bit about how I view belief. I don't know if this is a common trait of many, but for me I compartmentalize faith from 'reality' in my life. I have to as my profession is in the sciences. As faith is by definition, a belief in something that has no supporting data, there is little logical about it. In the sciences, it's all about logic. So, it would be quite silly of me to try to apply logic to faith. It would be like trying to mate a zebra with a hubcap.

Now see, that is an almost perfect match for what that evolutionary biologist in my OP does. And here's what gets me...why does faith get this special pass on logic? ....
Well, let me try this:

a != b

a is a member of A and subject to the standards of the set A
b is a member of B and subject to the standards of the set B.

Expecting a to be subject to the standards of B is nonsense.

Asking me why faith gets a pass on logic is like my asking why I don't get to publish articles in science about what I believe.

As I said, it's like trying to mate a zebra with a hubcap.

Why does love get a pass on logic, too? It just does. It's an emotion.


.... It might prove useful for you to read my take on "faith" here when answering: http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/86980-on-faith.html ... (which was another post that appeared to generate little interest in discussion. I seem to have a knack)....
LOL. Oops, I answered before reading your link. But, for now I am quite satisfied with my answer.

(K. Read it and still satisfied with my answer. As an aside, I have issues with that post you referenced, specifically item no. 1.)

And, don't worry, as long as you don't insinuate nasty shit for my having an emotion (faith), I will think your thread is interesting.

.... Now, since you're obviously talking about that fourth type of "faith" here, what is it about having that type of faith that you think is a good thing? I mean yes, I get the appeal of the claims being made. It would be nice IF they were true. But does making yourself feel better just acting like they are while putting yourself into some kind of state of total cognitive denial of any indications to the contrary by using this compartmentalization you're talking about really strike you as a very good idea? And of so.. why? Is it just the "it makes me feel better" thing or is there some other reasons you find that to be something desireable for you to do?

Well, as long as you assume that I am in total cognitive denial (read: willfully ignorant) for my choice to believe, I have a bit of a good idea why you seem to find that your posts get little attention from believers.

But, I will answer. I also love. There is nothing logical about that. I have loved very wrong persons, too. I guess that made me willfully ignorant for being in love to some, but to me, I know the difference between cognitive processes and emotional processes in the brain. As you keep trying to apply cognitive processes to emotional ones, good luck with that line of argument. The irony of the logic, eh?
 
Last edited:
Well, let me try this:

a != b

a is a member of A and subject to the standards of the set of A
b is a member of B and subject to the standards of the set B.

Expecting a to be subject to the standards of B is nonsense.

Which is skipping right past why the subject of your religious faith is in category 'b' instead of category 'a', which was actually my question.

Asking me why faith gets a pass on logic is like my asking why I don't get to publish articles in science about what I beleive.

No, it's significantly different than my asking that. Because that question has an obvious answer. Scientific journals are decicated to the publishing of well researched and peer reviewed data in the interests of maximizing the reliability of the conclusions reached by the scientific community and people's personal beliefs are generally not terribly relevent to that process.

Why does love get a pass on logic, too? It just does. It's an emotion.

It's not that it "just does". There are reaosns for everything. In this case, love doesn't make any claims about the real world existence of anything except... itself. And it's own existence is pretty much tautologically true. That's in a completely different category. If someone tells me they love someone there's nothing there to dispute. If that's how they feel that's how they feel, and they're not claiming anything EXCEPT that that's how they feel. And lacking the ability to telepathically read their mind their statement about how they feel is pretty much the highest authority avilable on the matter.

If, on the other hand, someone tried claiming that there was a secret underground tunnel from New York to Atlantis and then said they believed THAT because of "love" then I'd feel compelled to stop giving "love" a pass on logic too.

If the only thing you're claiming is "I have faith" with no further details provided, then fine, I see nothing top dispute there. You possess the cognitive property known as faith. No argument.

But that is not what we're talking about. You're saying you have faith in the actual real existence of this... other thing. External to you. Out in the world. And that's a different story.

Well, as long as you assume that I am in total cognitive denial (read: willfully ignorant) for my choice to believe, I have a bit of a good idea why your seem to find that your posts get little attention.

Please don't start getting all offended at me just for repeating what you said. You're the one that said you compartmentalized your faith from 'reality'... and that the subject of your faith had no supporting data.

How the heck else was I supposed to read that? Because I'm thinking back over it now and I'm not coming up with any alternatives here.

Regarding further comments on 'love', see above.
 
Last edited:
If you want to apply cognitive conditions on emotional processes and try to find answers that way, I do wish you the best of luck.

But, if you want to avoid spinning your wheels on that one, a primer on human brain fucntion might be in order for you.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top