# 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:** 27
**Author:** ![PBear42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecccb3/32.png) [@PBear42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PBear42)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/521 "2010-12-21T06:50:10Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That’s the weak and strong atheist position. I’ve seen it raised on these boards by atheists. And I’ve seen other atheists whine about it when I adopted their terminology in another thread. What I think it boils down to, for some, is that they don’t want to have to defend a position of belief, but on the other hand they want their position to merit the respect of a well thought out one. Kinda hard to have it both ways. > > For the record, I’m not accusing you of this. I don’t recall who played these games in other threads, but it’s childish. I’ve been following the thread and, frankly, I don’t understand this argument. Take the First Cause or cosmological argument. You realize, of course, that this has been around for a long time. We atheists have heard it before. In finding it not persuasive, we are saying (as has been pointed out) that it doesn’t solve the problem. If the Creator doesn’t require a cause, neither does the Universe. Or, rather, I would say, if we can’t way whence came the Creator, it doesn’t cause me upset not to be able to say whence came the Universe. IOW, as to creation, I’m an agnostic and calling it God adds nothing. This isn’t a belief. It’s the absence of belief. And, believe it or not, well thought out. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/522 "2010-12-21T07:00:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > What I think it boils down to, for some, is that they don’t want to have to defend a position of belief, but on the other hand they want their position to merit the respect of a well thought out one. Kinda hard to have it both ways. Both ways?!? It’s only one, and it’s the only possible position that’s well thought-out. > [@magellan01](#): > > First, thanks for attempting to answer this. My response is that lack of predictability and apparent randomness are no proof for causeless events. … > > So, I ask you as a scientifically minded person, isn’t the more rational position for you to have concerning QM is that “We just don’t know enough yet to understand it?” Why this rush to accept a principle that science has never seen—causeless events—and call it a day? It seems that you’re thinking that there may be some as-yet-undetected causes that are behind what looks to us like randomness. That’s not it. The idea of hidden causes has been ruled out -at least, any hidden causes that also rely on causes happening before their caused effects. For more info, look up Bell’s Inequality. Stuff at the quantum level is provably causeless. ---
**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 21, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/523 "2010-12-21T17:07:56Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That’s the weak and strong atheist position. I’ve seen it raised on these boards by atheists. And I’ve seen other atheists whine about it when I adopted their terminology in another thread. What I think it boils down to, for some, is that they don’t want to have to defend a position of belief, but on the other hand they want their position to merit the respect of a well thought out one. Kinda hard to have it both ways. > > For the record, I’m not accusing you of this. I don’t recall who played these games in other threads, but it’s childish. There are a couple of reasons why people can be weak atheists. First, they may not give a damn, and just lack of belief is good enough. These people probably shouldn’t be posting on Internet message boards about. The second are those who have gotten convinced that the strong atheist position involves a claim to knowledge that no gods exist, and who feel that this position is unreasonable. The third are those who have stronger criteria for belief than others, who may only want to believe if there is a very high chance of being correct. They may not be that sure. But I’m not denying that the position of some atheists is not well thought out. Neither theism or atheism can claim that 100% of adherents believe (or not believe) for good reasons. ---
**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 21, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/524 "2010-12-21T17:12:19Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > (bolding mine) > > maybe that’s because when I ask for people to demonstrate how QM negates my position all I get is crickets. Since you seem to hold that position, could you provide a simple explanation as to how and why QM conflicts with my premise? In general when we point to quantum foam or random fission events we get told that there must be a cause for all of them that hasn’t been discovered yet. If there is anything we’ve learned, it is that God does play dice. ---
**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 21, 2010, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/525 "2010-12-21T17:14:38Z")
> [@Kinthalis](#): > > I don’t _know_ that there is some prime mover non intervening god that hardly anyone believes in. > > But I sure as hell _know_ there is no YHWH, or Krishna or Zeus or Odin. > > I may be wrong, but I get the feeling the religious always prop up this non-descript, prime mover god that is unassailable, and that they themselves don’t believe in just so that they can point and say AHA! :rolleyes: Yeah - show me a falsifiable god and I can pretty well falsify him. You can falsify whole sets of tri- or bi-omni gods also. ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/526 "2010-12-21T18:04:12Z")
Most theists pick one god or one pantheon of gods. They disbelieve the existence of some other gods. (Some play the “I believe in all the gods” card, but I don’t believe them. That just makes it easier for me to come up with gods to disprove.) It is very hard to come up with reasons why your god is real and the others aren’t real. Atheists have it easy – they don’t believe in any gods at all. Of course, the “well, I believe in a god, but I can’t define it or explain it in any way.” folks have it easiest of all… ---
**Author:** ![sisu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@sisu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sisu)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/527 "2010-12-21T22:19:12Z")
> [@SmartAlecCat](#): > > Of course, the “well, I believe in a god, but I can’t define it or explain it in any way.” folks have it easiest of all.. I think that is typical of this board, condescending ignorant rubbish. We don’t have it easy, stating a black and white position is when you have it easiest. yes that means atheists as well as fundys. The people who are humble enough to say “We do not hope to understand all there is” have a tougher time. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/528 "2010-12-21T22:28:07Z")
Atheists don’t claim to “understand all there is”. We just claim there’s no evidence whatsoever that God explains _anything_. ---
**Author:** ![Gustav](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/919ad9/32.png) [@Gustav](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gustav)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/529 "2010-12-21T22:41:32Z")
I can not off hand think of _any_ topic of discussion where a black and white position is easier to defend than a vague one… ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/530 "2010-12-21T22:44:17Z")
> [@sisu](#): > > We don’t have it easy, stating a black and white position is when you have it easiest. Wrong. Stating a position with evidence behind it is when you have it easiest. I can easily defend the black and white position “the Earth is a spheroid”. “God exists” is a black or white position, but since there’s no extraordinary evidence for this extraordinary claim, holding that position is not “having it easy” (If I’m correct in assuming what **SmartAlecCat** means by having it easy is that one can easily provide rational reasons for holding a position). Atheists do have it easy because it’s easy to hold a rational position. There’s no evidence for the fantastic claim that gods exist therefore we are without belief. Easy. > [@](#): > > yes that means atheists as well as fundys. Right, because atheists are right up there with fundies.:rolleyes: Not sure why you’re claiming atheism is a black and white position. > [@](#): > > The people who are humble enough to say “We do not hope to understand all there is” have a tougher time. Have a tougher time with what? You realize many if not most atheists are humble enough to say that, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![sisu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@sisu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sisu)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/531 "2010-12-21T22:56:19Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > Wrong. Stating a position with evidence behind it is when you have it easiest. I can easily defend the black and white position “the Earth is a spheroid”. “God exists” is a black or white position, but since there’s no extraordinary evidence for this extraordinary claim, holding that position is not “having it easy” (If I’m correct in assuming what **SmartAlecCat** means by having it easy is that one can easily provide rational reasons for holding a position). > > Atheists do have it easy because it’s easy to hold a rational position. There’s no evidence for the fantastic claim that gods exist therefore we are without belief. Easy. > > Right, because atheists are right up there with fundies.:rolleyes: Not sure why you’re claiming atheism is a black and white position. > Have a tougher time with what? You realize many if not most atheists are humble enough to say that, don’t you? I cannot hope to justify to you my belief in logical or rational terms, as this is the only way that you see the world I can never win. I really don’t care if I win or not, I just hope that you see the world as a wonderful place and love it as I do. If you do that, then that is enough. You see I am not about making you believe in a god, as I do not believe in a literal afterlife or hell. There is no god or there is a god, is about as black and white as it gets. Not saying one is right or wrong but they are both ultimate views. Your last comment is an insightful one, this is also my claim in regards to spiritual/religious people. Some are far out wack jobs and some of us are pretty close to what you would consider rational human beings. Remember the world is a bell curve not binary. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/532 "2010-12-21T23:24:06Z")
> [@sisu](#): > > There is no god or there is a god, is about as black and white as it gets. Not saying one is right or wrong but they are both ultimate views. What’s it going to take to get through to you that atheism doesn’t require saying “There is no god”? Plenty of atheists (and maybe some theists) have made this point in this thread alone. For a refresher, check out posts 13, 27, 41, 50, 55, 79,…eh, I gave up looking for more examples at post 100. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2010, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/533 "2010-12-21T23:24:18Z")
> [@sisu](#): > > There is no god or there is a god, is about as black and white as it gets. Not saying one is right or wrong but they are both ultimate views. The traffic light is either red or green. True, all the evidence says it’s red, but really, who can say for sure? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2010, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/534 "2010-12-22T04:38:05Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > That wasn’t your reasoning. Your argument was: > > Yet before that you said: > > In your first argument you claim it’s irrational to believe something can exist without a cause because of all the things man has looked at there has always been a cause. In your second, you claim there is something that exists without a cause even though that contradicts what you said about it being irrational for there to be one exception. You even said, “you choose a position that has ZERO history of existing.” > > Don’t think you’ve contradicted yourself? Of course you have. Now you’re trying to weasel out of it by giving your first cause a special exception, even though it’s an exception “that has ZERO history of existing.” Of course there is an exception to my argument that everything needs a cause—otherwise I wouldn’t hold the position I do. It necessitates a special exception, and that exception is a Creator God. If you want to characterize the blaring obvious exception as a contradiction :rolleyes:, well, knock yourself out. > [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > The IronChariots website has tackled your contention that something had to start everything in motion and it must have been a sentient being, although they did it regarding those claiming this being must be outside of time. I’ll replace “time” with “this realm.” > > [http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Cosmological\_argument](http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Cosmological_argument) I’m not impressed. There’s nothing there that hasn’t been offered on these boards. By the way, where did the particle come from? Your back to a Creator God. You disagree fine. I don’t think there’s much point in pursuing this discussion any further. > [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > The first quote was attributed to **Czarcasm**. You said: _“So, you choose a position that has ZERO history of existing.”_ **Czarcasm** didn’t choose the position you claimed he did. Look at Post 477. I believe that he believes in the exception I laid out. If he doesn’t, he’s free to correct me. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2010, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/535 "2010-12-22T04:43:22Z")
> [@Kinthalis](#): > > It matters because it is ONLY of this propped up prime mover non interventionist god that we can’t say for certain if he exists or not. The same is not true of the actual gods being worshipped by religious people. the point is that there are two steps to the argument. One is to challenge someone on the claim that there is a god. The other is to challenge someone on the flavor of God they choose or the religion they practice. These two things are often conflated around here. I wish I had a nickel that someone attempting to argue against the existence of a God attacked a particular religion instead and thought he/she scored some easy points. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/536 "2010-12-22T04:46:19Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > In general when we point to quantum foam or random fission events we get told that there must be a cause for all of them that hasn’t been discovered yet. > If there is anything we’ve learned, it is that God does play dice. So, don’t you agree that that negates the “uncaused events do to happen, all the time, in QM” argument? ---
**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 22, 2010, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/537 "2010-12-22T04:50:14Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Look at Post 477. I believe that he believes in the exception I laid out. If he doesn’t, he’s free to correct me. You got _that_ from my saying I didn’t have enough information to even hazard a guess?? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2010, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/538 "2010-12-22T04:53:28Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > It necessitates a special exception, and that exception is a Creator God. Why can’t the universe itself be the special exception? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2010, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/539 "2010-12-22T04:55:33Z")
> [@PBear42](#): > > I’ve been following the thread and, frankly, I don’t understand this argument. Take the First Cause or cosmological argument. You realize, of course, that this has been around for a long time. We atheists have heard it before. In finding it not persuasive, we are saying (as has been pointed out) that it doesn’t solve the problem. If the Creator doesn’t require a cause, neither does the Universe. Or, rather, I would say, if we can’t way whence came the Creator, it doesn’t cause me upset not to be able to say whence came the Universe. IOW, as to creation, I’m an agnostic and calling it God adds nothing. This isn’t a belief. It’s the absence of belief. And, believe it or not, well thought out. I know the argument is not new. So what? In this post you claim to be an agnostic and and atheist. Can one be both? As far as calling it “God”. Let’s say the universe was in fact created, but it was by a special particle. Would you bristle if I called it The Super-Duper-Creating-Eternal-Sentient-Particle? ---
**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 22, 2010, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281/540 "2010-12-22T04:58:16Z")
If one believes that there was a “First Event”, calling it the “Creator” isn’t too much of a stretch, _if_ one had never heard the term used as a name for the deity-of-choice in various religions, but switching the name to the Creator God gives the term further meaning that cannot be ignored. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281.md?page=26) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-atheists-insist-that-atheism-is-a-non-belief/564281.md?page=28)