Often enough, I get visitors that read a post or two of mine and then leave a comment that they think is going to change my mind about all this atheism business. Sitting in my comments list, I routinely find nicely formatted arguments that invariably end with “Therefore, God must exist.”
Now let’s think about this for a moment. I run a website dedicated (mostly) to atheism and secular humanism. It stands to reason that I’ve done a fair bit of research about the things that I believe. I’m not just some “Sunday Atheist,” passively not believing in God. And I have no reason to cling to my ideas if I change my mind about their validity. In fact, a little over a year ago, I stopped eating meat. Previously an avid omnivore, I chronicled my decision and the reasons for my new-found vegetarianism on this blog. Clearly, I’m capable of admitting when I’m wrong about something when new information presents itself.
But therein lies the catch.
The ubiquitous little three-premise God Proofs that I mentioned earlier aren’t new.
Nearly every argument I’ve heard for the existence of God has been around for a long, long, long time. Ebon Musings has an unparallelled description of every argument ever publicly advanced for the existence of God. I recommend reading it, but please be aware that it’s a doozy of an article.
Faced with this information, there are really only three paths that an Evangelist can take.
- Refuse to research prior metaphysical arguments, and continue using half-formed Teleological arguments to campaign for God’s existence. This is clearly a bad idea. Surprisingly, however, it’s an extremely popular one.
- Find holes in the refutations offered. Oddly enough, many theists have tried this in the past without much luck. In fact, they’ve been trying it for centuries. It’s harder than you might think… But if you’re up to the challenge, I applaud your chutzpah.
- Invent an entirely new argument for the existence of God. This is actually what most theists or Pop Philosophers think they’ve done. The reality is that every argument I’ve heard on my blog, and in general, has been around for quite some time. If someone comes up with a new, irrefutable argument for the existence of God, I should hope they’re doing something more to publicize it than posting on my modest blog. But if he or she chooses to unveil it here, I’ll be happy to host the party.
But wait, I can anticipate your response: If the arguments for the non-existence of God are so old and so strong, why aren’t atheists the majority? Why do most social groups believe in some type of God figure?
Well first off, most people don’t examine their belief structures especially hard. As you’ll see when you research, theology is a complex and sometimes confusing matter. People are also heavily invested in belief. But regardless of all that, popular ideas aren’t necessarily good ideas. I mean, we used to think that women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
And besides, you’ve just made an argument that’s been addressed many times before: The argument from popularity.
As I’ve mentioned in the past, I never censor comments, so I don’t anticipate an end to those tidy little “proofs” I keep seeing pop up. And I will continue to address them as best I can. But even though I do make earnest attempts to engage in discussion despite my busy schedule, I can’t be everywhere all the time. Who do you think I am, God?
I simply hope that this blog post inspires some of the online Evangelists that happen upon it to read more and examine their own arguments. If someone comes up with a genuinely new argument, I’m as excited as you are to hear about it.


6 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 14, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Anna
then what is the benefit of being a good person?
isn’t every decision you make good? who’s to say it isn’t?
September 14, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Derek
I’m sorry Anna, this is precisely the sort of thing I’m talking about.
Atheistic foundations of morality are widely published and easy to find. It’s not as if you were the first person to come up with the “How do wer define morality” challenge.
If you’d like an introduction to a non-theistic morality theory, I suggest reading up on Utilitarianism and Secular Humanism.
September 14, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Jolly Sapper
Do you do good things as an end or as a means to an end Anna?
Or more appropriately, which is better, to do that which is good because it is the right thing to do, or to that which is good because doing good an intermediary step to some other goal?
To me, its a far better thing to do good for the sake of doing good that it is to do good only to garner favor. I suppose being able to claim good deed points and spend them on salvation is an okay way to reinforce good behavior but is it wrong for me to wonder about the motives of the individual who does good deeds only for the good deed points?
September 14, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Derek
Furthermore, as Dawkins famously (and others not quite so famously) pointed out, theistic foundations for morality are tough to sell.
If you say that morality comes from religious texts (the Bible, the Torah, the Quran, etc.), I’m left wondering about all the clearly immoral recommendations found in these texts — like commands to stone adulterers. And how do we pick the parts that tell us what is moral or not, and which are simply anachronistic?
We might be able to arrive at the conclusion that cold-blooded murder is wrong both through the Bible Ethics or through Humanist Ethics, but Humanism has the added benefit of not being internally inconsistent.
And if you take the slightly more metaphysical stance that an absolute theoretical good implies an absolute natural good (i.e., God) I’d like to point you to the many theories of morality that posit a partially subjective notion of moral good. Alternatively, the theory of Universal Utilitarianism arrives at absolute objective morality without the aid of theology, making the conclusion of a morality-begets-God argument flawed.
September 14, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Anna
Ok! That reminds me of a funny thing our college president once said. He would only allow us to use the ‘language’ that was in the Bible until he learned about some verses.
–yeah that’s tough
To Jolly, you do make a point –don’t do good only for favor.
However, you make a false assumption. I do not spend good deeds on salvation.
September 14, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Derek
Of course not, though such a karmic vending machine would certainly be convenient. I picture a big thing that looks a little bit like a parking meter, with “Time Remaining in Heaven” ticking down until you add more good deed tokens.