# Why do atheists insist that atheism is a 'non-belief'? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 15, 2010, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281 "2010-12-15T20:50:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![Galileo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/85e7bf/32.png) [@Galileo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Galileo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/441 "2010-12-20T15:56:09Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > If religionists have such a hard time understanding such a simple concept even they use that very same concept themselves when it comes other less ridiculous ideas, then there is not much I can do. Religionists? You mean like Pascal, Descartes, Liebnitz, and Newton? Boy, they were too dense to understand such a _simple_ concept.:dubious: If you were discussing atheism with those guys, would you just say: “I have no belief. You are wrong, I am right”? Or would you try to bring them up to speed in geology, physics, chemistry, and genetics, and point out there are now naturalistic explanations that they hadn’t considered? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/442 "2010-12-20T16:01:17Z")
> [@Galileo](#): > > Religionists? You mean like Pascal, Descartes, Liebnitz, and Newton? > Boy, they were too dense to understand such a _simple_ concept.:dubious: > > If you were discussing atheism with those guys, would you just say: “I have no belief. You are wrong, I am right”? Or would you try to bring them up to speed in geology, physics, chemistry, and genetics, and point out there are now naturalistic explanations that they hadn’t considered? I have no belief. I have been given no logical reason to have a belief. That is all there is to it, and if any of your listed religionists were alive _and had access to the information mankind has gathered since their heyday_, you might be more surprised than I as to how they would think. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/443 "2010-12-20T16:03:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Because everything we are aware of is the result of a cause. Stuff had to come from somewhere. Things had to be set in motion. What set that in motion?. Whatever set that in motion ,in turn had to be set in motion. That line of thinking never ends . The first cause argument is a treadmill. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/444 "2010-12-20T16:06:09Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Because everything we are aware of is the result of a cause. Stuff had to come from somewhere. Things had to be set in motion. You obviously don’t understand quantum physics. The universe is not a pool table. ---
**Author:** ![Galileo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/85e7bf/32.png) [@Galileo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Galileo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/445 "2010-12-20T16:38:45Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I have no belief. I have been given no logical reason to have a belief. That is all there is to it, and if any of your listed religionists were alive _and had access to the information mankind has gathered since their heyday_, you might be more surprised than I as to how they would think. Nice side step. :rolleyes: BTW, I didn’t ask you what would happen if they had access to recent information, and you don’t know what they would think or who would be more surprised. Nice idle speculation, though. And, in case you missed the point, there are intelligent people today who believe in the existence of God. Do you think if someone makes a claim, you are entitled to ask for evidence for that claim? I’m guessing yes, although you might quibble with “entitled”. You said this: > [@](#): > > Considering the scarcity of evidence when it comes to deities combined with the multiple illogical and contradictory claims made by religionists, “I have no belief” _is_ the most reasonable option out there. I dispute your claim that “I have no belief” is the most reasonable option out there. Please provide evidence to support your claim. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/446 "2010-12-20T16:59:45Z")
> [@Galileo](#): > > **Mijin** , are you suggesting that atheists don’t have any presuppositions that are linked to the idea of atheism? That’s right. Of course we can then go a level beyond and say why does atheism seem a more reasonable position to me than theism, and the answer is in my case is for a number of rational reasons, such as Occam’s, the burden of proof etc. So you may say “Ah, so atheism is built on particular rational principles…”, but while this may be true in many cases, it’s true for a vast chunk of human knowledge too, both formal and practical. If atheism is built on rational foundations, then so is, say, pottery. And note that believing that we should think rationally is not the same as making the claim that the universe is rational. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/447 "2010-12-20T17:07:44Z")
> [@Galileo](#): > > there are intelligent people today who believe in the existence of God. I’d probably find this impressive if those intelligent people were independently “discovering” God, instead of of just following the line of least resistance and parroting the beliefs of their parents and/or peers. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/448 "2010-12-20T17:18:35Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’d probably find this impressive if those intelligent people were independently “discovering” God, instead of of just following the line of least resistance and parroting the beliefs of their parents and/or peers. And even more impressive if they had all believed in the _same_ god. ---
**Author:** ![Galileo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/85e7bf/32.png) [@Galileo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Galileo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/449 "2010-12-20T17:22:23Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Of course we can then go a level beyond and say why does atheism seem a more reasonable position to me than theism, and the answer is in my case is for a number of rational reasons, such as Occam’s, the burden of proof etc. So those are “reasons” and not “presuppositions”? What do you think is the relevant difference between the two in relation to atheism? Also, you accept the validity of [Occam’s razor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor), but I’m sure you disagree with Ockham on this: > [@](#): > > For Ockham, the only truly necessary entity is God; everything else, the whole of creation, is radically contingent through and through. Do you just dismiss Ockham’s presupposition, or do you have a counterargument? It does appear that it was the foundation of the Razor, so how do you still accept the Razor without the foundation? I’m not saying that you must accept it. I’m just wondering how you justify not accepting it. > [@](#): > > And note that believing that we should think rationally is not the same as making the claim that the universe is rational. Of course, the two parts of your sentence are different but it seems that you are suggesting that there is no relation of one with the other. Okay, I’ll say this with a smile: Please provide support for your claim. 🙂 (BTW, as you know, saying “note that …” does not make a claim true.) ---
**Author:** ![Galileo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/85e7bf/32.png) [@Galileo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Galileo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/450 "2010-12-20T17:29:37Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’d probably find this impressive if those intelligent people were independently “discovering” God, instead of of just following the line of least resistance and parroting the beliefs of their parents and/or peers. You mean the way that you have independently falsified geocentrism, and verified evolution, relativity, quantum mechanics, genetics, and the age of the universe? Oh, wait! That has nothing to do with atheism. You can be a reasonable atheist without having any idea of how the world works. All you have to do is not believe in God and get on with your life. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/451 "2010-12-20T17:36:19Z")
> [@Galileo](#): > > Nice side step. :rolleyes: > > BTW, I didn’t ask you what would happen if they had access to recent information, and you don’t know what they would think or who would be more surprised. Nice idle speculation, though. > > And, in case you missed the point, there are intelligent people today who believe in the existence of God. Do you think if someone makes a claim, you are entitled to ask for evidence for that claim? I’m guessing yes, although you might quibble with “entitled”. If you are bringing up the religiosity of scientists in the past, it is perfectly acceptable to doubt that they would have the same opinions today. I’ve been reading a collection of scientific writing from before 1800, and several writers discussing the age of the earth make reasonable, to them, but quite wrong assumptions. I’m pretty sure that given the information available today they’d have a different opinion. While some intelligent people believe, atheism is more and more accepted the higher you go in education and scientific accomplishment. That should mean something. > [@](#): > > You said this:I dispute your claim that “I have no belief” is the most reasonable option out there. > > Please provide evidence to support your claim. I can do this easily - noting that you are confusing support for a logical argument with support for a fact about the world. The null hypothesis has to be that there are no gods, since otherwise we’d have to choose a god as the default. This could only be done by claiming strong evidence for a particular god (which is what we are trying to show,) choosing a default god for invalid reasons (mommy believed) or choosing one randomly. To falsify the null hypothesis, one would have to provide significant evidence. In the old days this was that there were no know origins for the earth and universe except gods. That is no longer the case. So, the null hypothesis of no god is the logical default, and atheists, as we should, ask theists again and again to provide evidence to falsify it. The lack of such evidence is support for this claim. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/452 "2010-12-20T17:36:24Z")
**Galileo** : the point is that _none_ of them have replicated the experiment in which somebody found god(s), not that all of them haven’t. I agree with your penultimate and last sentences, though. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/453 "2010-12-20T17:46:23Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > You obviously don’t understand quantum physics. The universe is not a pool table. Oh, really? Please explain how quantum physics negates what I said. And please be specific. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/454 "2010-12-20T17:47:45Z")
When a stranger tells me he has an invisible pooka friend named “Harvey”, I don’t bother with “counterarguments”-I just tell him I disbelieve and move on, unless he has some evidence for his position of course. When a group of people tell me that they have an invisible friend that can grant wishes, I don’t bother with counterarguments-I just disbelieve and move on. When a _large_ group of people tell me that their invisible friend created the whole world…no, the whole galaxy…no, the whole universe…no, he _is_ the whole universe!..and…and…and you can’t find him 'cause he lives _outside_ the universe!!-I don’t bother with counterargument(where the hell would you even start?), I disbelieve, and wonder why anyone would think that adding impossibility upon impossibility would make a claim more believable, and not less. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/455 "2010-12-20T17:50:48Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > What set that in motion?. Whatever set that in motion ,in turn had to be set in motion. > That line of thinking never ends . The first cause argument is a treadmill. That’s the point, that you keep going back further and further. But at some point you NEED a First Cause. If not, you have an event happening without a cause. You do realize that runs smack in opposition to all scientific discovery, right. So, you choose a position for which there is ZERO evidence of it EVER happening and counter to the one that is proven true a trillion trillion times every nanosecond? Do you really think that that is the more rational position? If so, why? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/456 "2010-12-20T17:51:59Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > When a stranger tells me he has an invisible pooka friend named “Harvey”, I don’t bother with “counterarguments”-I just tell him I disbelieve and move on, unless he has some evidence for his position of course. > When a group of people tell me that they have an invisible friend that can grant wishes, I don’t bother with counterarguments-I just disbelieve and move on. > When a _large_ group of people tell me that their invisible friend created the whole world…no, the whole galaxy…no, the whole universe…no, he _is_ the whole universe!..and…and…and you can’t find him 'cause he lives _outside_ the universe!!-I don’t bother with counterargument(where the hell would you even start?), I disbelieve, and wonder why anyone would think that adding impossibility upon impossibility would make a claim more believable, and not less. Could you please respond to the post I just made to **gonzomax**? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/457 "2010-12-20T17:58:30Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > You obviously don’t understand quantum physics. The universe is not a pool table. Of course not. It’s a craps table! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/458 "2010-12-20T17:58:57Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Could you please respond to the post I just made to **gonzomax**? > > Thanks. No prob, dude. I have not acquired enough information/evidence/facts to make an informed decision on the matter, _yet_. Your guess is as good as mine. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/459 "2010-12-20T18:06:51Z")
> [@Galileo](#): > > You mean the way that you have independently falsified geocentrism, and verified evolution, relativity, quantum mechanics, genetics, and the age of the universe? I’m not doubting the intelligence of these people - I just don’t find their belief in God impressive. Lots of intelligent people believe in God. So do lots of dumb people. It’s not the individual’s intelligence in some specific field like math or physics that matters - it’s how readily they absorbed the indoctrination of their parents. If intelligence _was_ relevant to belief, I guess we’d see religious breakthroughs coming daily from smart people worldwide, as we do in science and technology. With the increasing power of information technology, religion should be advancing at a geometric pace. The smartest people would have religious beliefs that were more nuanced that those of average people, or something. Instead, we get “Isaac Newton believed in God, presumably the same God that Norman the inbred sheep-fucker believed in.” Big whoop. If you want to claim, or at least imply, that there must be something to this “God” business because smart people in history bought into it, go ahead. It’s just not a very compelling argument. If anything, it makes me feel sorry for the geniuses trapped in a more primitive time. I feel likewise about modern prodigies who have the misfortune to be born in the crappier parts of the world, like wartorn Africa or North Korea or the Phelps clan, where their talents can’t reach their full potential. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/460 "2010-12-20T18:17:08Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > No prob, dude. > I have not acquired enough information/evidence/facts to make an informed decision on the matter, _yet_. Your guess is as good as mine. Fair enough. But I’m just asking that given the information you do have, which position is the _more_ rational one? One in which there was a First Cause or one in which there wasn’t? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281.md?page=24)