“There is no God!” – A Common Atheist Belief

In the previous posting, I showed that atheist activist leaders subscribe to the belief that “there are no gods.”  That is, their atheism is not a lack of god belief.  Their atheism is a belief that God does not exist.  But just how common is this?

There is actually quite a bit of evidence to support the contention that atheism as a belief – a belief there is no God – is actually very common.  And I base this is on my own experience interacting with many, many atheists over the years.  If you yourself have similar experience, consider how well this evidence resonates.

1.Notice that when activists like the FFRF publicly promote the “there are no gods” view, and such promotion is widely advertised on atheist media, there is no significant pushback. There are no complaints about the wrong definition of atheism being promoted. This tells us that the “atheism is simply a lack of god belief” view is not held very seriously by atheists or not held by very many atheists.  What’s more, when someone like a Louise Antony comes along and informs an interviewer that she knows there is no God, there is much cheerleading and back-slapping among the atheist community.

2.The “atheism is simply a lack of god belief” position is not strong enough to merit the “God belief is a delusion” belief that is so common among the atheists. Simply lacking a belief in X does not mean that belief in X is a delusion.  The only way to justify the notion that a belief in X is a delusion is to know that X does not exist.

Let’s illustrate with a concrete example.   There is no evidence for the existence of extra-terrestrial intelligence (ETI).  None.  In fact, there isn’t anything that could reasonably qualify as a mere clue that ETI exists.  And all of this remains true when scientists working at SETI have been searching for decades.  Yet even with all this, I can only conclude there is no evidence for ETI and thus lack ETI belief.   I cannot reasonably declare that I have knowledge that ETI does not exist (for lack of evidence is not evidence of lack).  Thus, I don’t proclaim “there is no ETI!”

Now, there are lots of people who believe ETI exists.  Do I think they are delusional?  No.  Because I lack ETI belief because of lack of evidence, I simply think they are mistaken.  But I also recognize they could, in the end, be right.  We could one day discover evidence for ETI.  So I can’t really say there are delusional.  That would be irrational on my end.

When atheists insist religious people are delusional, they must be doing so from a “there are no gods” position.  And since it is common for atheists to declare religious people are delusional and that “religion is but myth and superstition that burdens our hearts and enslaves our minds,’’  it stands to reason the “there are no gods” position is likewise very common.

3.Dawkins has a 7 point scale on theistic belief . Here are points 5-7:

  1. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. “I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.”

  2. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. “I don’t know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”

  3. Strong atheist. “I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one.”

Throughout the years, anytime I have encountered atheists discussing this scale among themselves, the most common score people give themselves is a 7 (or 6.9).

A recent example involves activist Hemant Mehta.  This example is especially ironic because Mehta, being the savvy activist, tries to steer his fellow atheists away from the score of 7:


Also, saying you’re a 7 basically means no amount of evidence could ever convince you that you’re wrong. That sort of dogmatism seems to go against everything atheists claim to stand for.

LOL.  In other words, a score of 7 damages the narrative Mehta and his fellow activists are trying to sell.

Yet despite this, if you read through the comments section of his youtube page, you’ll find once again that a score of 7 or 6.9 is the most common score atheists give themselves [BTW, a 6.9 is the score someone gives themselves when they are a 7, but don’t want to admit it]

If it was common for atheists to be people who merely lacked God belief because of lack of evidence, you would think scores between 5 and 6 would be most common.  Instead, what seems to attract most of these internet atheists is the score of 7 –  I know there is no God.

4.And the final piece of evidence comes from the responses we get when atheists are asked what type of data they would count as evidence for God. That is, when the atheist insists there is no evidence for God, and is asked to clarify what they think such evidence would look like, they typically ignore the request or have great difficulty answering the question.  This makes no sense if they are people who merely lack God belief because of lack of evidence.  Such people would have thought about this, sifted through the data, and discovered that none of the data represent the evidence they were looking for.  They could easily answer the question by telling us what they did not find.

For example, I have already mentioned that I lack belief in ETI because of lack of evidence.  If a believer in ETI asked me what I would count as evidence for ETI, it would be very easy to reply.

So why do so many atheists have so much trouble telling us what would count as evidence for God?  Because their atheism is not rooted in an investigation that discovered no evidence.  It is rooted in the belief “there are no gods.”  Their atheism is indeed a belief system.

Add it all up.  Atheist activists proudly proclaim “there are no gods” and give each other awards for doing this.  Their atheist followers cheer all of this.  Those who follow the atheist activists likewise preach that religion is delusion, score themselves as a 6.9-7 on Dawkins scale, and have trouble articulating what evidence for God would even look like.  The evidence clearly indicates the atheist activist community is a community of believers – people who believe “there is no God.”

It’s time for this community to be honest with itself and with others.

This entry was posted in atheism, atheist activism, Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to “There is no God!” – A Common Atheist Belief

  1. essiep says:

    I guess there are differences between those searching for ET and those who search for a god. The SETI people would say that they’ve found proof YET. The religious would say that their god is not provable.
    The analogy is not directly comparable in my view.

  2. Regual Llegna says:

    essiep says: “The analogy is not directly comparable in my view.”

    Actually the analogy is comparable because the SETI people want to find “intelligent” life forms in any point of the observable space that could be capable of intercepting the signal that they send.

    essiep says: “The SETI people would say that they’ve found proof YET.”

    They don’t have good reasons, in their own view, to give up their hope, so they have faith that they will find “intelligent” life forms in space, in their own life times, before they die.

    Of course finding “intelligent” life forms in some point in space is not necessarily a progress at all for any human being, outside simply info like the study of fossils, and include a almost infinite amout of unknown variables.

    The science fiction stories put in the head of manny people that “aliens” should be more advanced that current humans in various ways or everyway possible to be considered “intelligent” beings, then that way “aliens” become important for others sciences beside biology.

    essiep says: “The religious would say that their god is not provable.”

    No true religious person would say that sentence “… their god is not provable.” they would say “that their god/gods is/are more provable/s than anything conceivable by any human” only a person with deistic belief would say that sentence, because a deistic god is neutral in every conceivable way unless they claim otherwise, or an agnostic person, because they don’t have trust in what they belief and they admit that they choose to identify with their doubts, or a gnu atheist, that almost every time try to lie about being a “soft” atheist instead to be honest to say that “they don’t believe in any god” like this post in this page says. They can hold some spiritual beliefs with religious devotion but they never will be religious, a least the same way that gnus say religious people hold they set of beliefs.

    A religious people would say that their god have more priority that whatever he/she/it create and priority in comparation with any form of materialistic views about reality, if not then they don’t hold the belief that their god is divine/sacred so no more important that others concepts like usually in polytheism when no high god, ubber god, panteon head or source of god/gods are included.

  3. TFBW says:

    It’s time for this community to be honest with itself and with others.

    It’s a rhetorical question, I know, but let me take it literally for a moment and ask, “why?”
    Why should they be honest with themselves and others? Honesty would hurt their cause (or at least make it harder), and probably give them a bad case of cognitive dissonance to boot. Much better to pay lip service to honesty and intellectual integrity while shrugging off all rational burdens via the oilskin of “non-belief”, don’t you think?

    After all, what grounds do they have for genuinely valuing honesty, as opposed to paying lip service to it for rhetorical reasons? Lack of belief offers no possible grounds, and neither does belief in the non-existence of God. One could profess to value honesty for its own sake, as a kind of fundamental principle, but what’s to keep them honest about their principled honesty — even to themselves, let alone their ideological enemies? In my experience, acting on principled honesty over personal desires is not typical human behaviour, particularly when there’s no penalty for choosing the latter over the former. That’s all I see here.

  4. FZM says:

    The evidence clearly indicates the atheist activist community is a community of believers – people who believe “there is no God.”

    There seem to be some strong arguments for the idea that this community is in fact a community of believers.

    I think in general if an atheist (even if they aren’t an activist) holds an opinion or comments on the value or truth of theistic belief and religion they are thereby necessarily a believer in something, or more likely, some range of things. And it seems justifiable to define ‘atheism’ in such a way that beliefs which are directly relevant to reaching negative conclusions about the truth and value of theistic belief are included in the concept.

    Even those atheists who don’t sign up to the ‘there is no God’ position, when they hold an opinion on the question they must necessarily be believers in some things. For example, if an atheist lacks belief in God because they think there is no evidence to justify it, they believe in some form of evidentialism, they believe that if God exists such and such evidence should demonstrate it, and they believe that this evidence is not present at the moment.

    Sometimes people may also say that while they personally are an atheist (just lack a belief in God), they don’t mind what other people believe and claim to have no strong opinion about theistic belief as long as it plays no role and has no influence in public life, politics, is excluded from education, culture as far as possible, and is generally in decline. This kind of view obviously involves having strong beliefs about the value and worth of theistic belief.

  5. SteveK says:

    Well said, FZM.

  6. SteveK says:

    Fun story…
    I bumped into Stardust Psyche after he was banned here, and attempted to get him to answer Michael’s question about what evidence for God would look like. I thought I would get the typical God-of-the-gaps, but what I got was equally as bad.

    What I got was very sloppy thinking from him, which is what we typically get from new atheist activists. Rather than argue over and correct his faulty understand of who God is and what science can show, I gladly took advantage of his Gnu way of thinking – to his detriment.

    What I got was SP admitting there is scientific evidence for a god. Not the God of the bible, but “small g” god. Oops! Your atheism is untenable now. Lacking belief is no longer an option. Will you stop identifying as an atheist, Dusty?

    The argument is horrible so I would never use it, but it was Dusty’s argument. Sometimes a mirror is the best thing you can hand a person.

  7. Ratheist says:

    Wow what a stupid fucking post. I think you’re getting dumber the longer you hang around this echo chamber you’ve created.

  8. Kevin says:

    The lack of details in your “rebuttal” demonstrates your knowledge that he is right and you are not.

  9. Pingback: Lack-of-Belief Atheism is Bullshit | The Reconquista Initiative

  10. In keeping with the theme of the OP, also consider the words of atheist Luke Muehlhauser, the author of the website ‘commonsenseatheism.com’, which was very popular during New Atheism’s heyday. In his 23rd of February 2009 article “Atheism and the Burden of Proof”, which was accessed on the 8th of August 2016, Muehlhauser states the following:

    [QUOTE] But most intellectually-inclined atheists I know do not merely “lack” a belief in God – as, say, my dog lacks a belief in God. Atheists like to avoid the burden of proof during debates, so they say they merely “lack” a belief in God. But this is not what their writings usually suggest. No, most intellectual atheists positively believe that God does not exist. In fact, most of them will say – at least to other atheists – that it’s “obvious” there is no God, or that they “know” – as well as we can “know” anything – that God does not exist. Thus, if the atheist wants to defend what he really believes, then he, too, has a burden of proof. He should give reasons for why he thinks that God almost certainly doesn’t exist. (http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=597, bold emphasis added) [UNQUOTE]

    Note how Muehlhauser—who did indeed run a very popular atheist blog with numerous commentators and who interviewed dozens of atheists and theists alike—states that 1) most of the intellectually-inclined atheists that he knows do not merely lack a belief in God, and that 2) atheists will admit to other atheists that they know that there is no God, and also that 3) atheists like to avoid the burden of proof in debates. So here we have an atheist with a solid number of connections in the atheist community, tacitly admitting that lack-of-belief atheism is often just a shell-game meant to help atheists avoid the burden of proof.


  11. Michael says:

    Wow what a stupid fucking post. I think you’re getting dumber the longer you hang around this echo chamber you’ve created.

    So you say. Your problem is that I have provided evidence that atheist activists and their followers believe “there are no gods.” Do you have any evidence that I am wrong? Or are we supposed to accept on blind faith that atheist activists and their followers merely “lack god belief?”

    Another problem you have is that many of us here value critical thinking and this creates quite the obstacle for those atheist actvist talking points we’re all supposed to just believe.

  12. hikayamasan353 says:

    At least I believe in ETI. The whole big size of the universe, along with the big possibility of inhabitable planets outside the Solar System, is a very big potential evidence that ETI might exist. Aliens surely might look other than the typical “little green men”. Look at Stellaris. I like this game because of the alien biodiversity. Humans, birds, reptilians, mammals, molluscs, insects, plants… There also might be chance that there is synthetic intelligence, other than organic. Even though we haven’t heard any signs of direct contact with ET, the whole fact that the Universe is big, huge, has a lot of galaxies and stars, is alone the evidence of potential existence of ET animals, sentient or not.
    The Fermi paradox itself is not an evidence against the existence of ETI. The Fermi paradox is pointing out the contradiction between the huge size of the universe, along with apparent lack of evidence of ET contacts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.