Why atheism over agnosticism?

[stromboli]

First of all you can't define the undefinable. It doesn't matter how you picture god or under what conditions god supposedly exists, because as I have said here a few times, god by nature is supernatural which puts him beyond our ability to quantify or describe. So in the end all you are talking about are suppositions. My stance is that by sheer lack of anything that can be considered as evidence, god for all intents and purposes doesn't exist. Nothing attributed to god can be proven to be true. Prayer doesn't work, faith healing doesn't work, miracles can't be shown to work or be from a god and so on. Both currently and historically there is simply nothing that can pointed to as evidence.

Absence of evidence is evidence of absence, the end.

[Munch]

I recall having this debate months about about santa, where a christian guy we had on here, preacher, couldn't convince me father christmas didn't exist, seemed kind of scared of approaching the debate even.

But since children believe in father christmas, why then would it not exist?

Maybe because the childrens parents told the child he exists, gets the kid to go to bed early on christmas eve, wraps up their presents and puts them under the tree, and even leaves half eaten cookies and milk out, so when little billy comes down in the morning, he's completely convinced santa is real.

Thats your religion for you, stories made up by other people, long since dead, that gullible man-childs believe in. The difference between santa and god, children stop believing in the story of santa when they grow up, while god worshipers never grow up.

[Contemporary Protestant]

well my question was answered so im happy

[trdsf]

It appears to me that more people are atheist, than there are agnostics. Which doesn't make sense to me, isn't atheism an assumption about something that cannot be known with certainty?

I guess I'd call myself a semi-gnostic atheist, on the basis that the god hypothesis of how the universe works simply isn't supported by observation, and I don't feel compelled to continue looking for proof of that theory in the same way that I don't feel compelled to look for proof of the phlogiston or caloric theories of heat, or the luminiferous aether.

If proof were to present itself, that's another matter entirely, but I don't expect it any more than I expect proof to turn up for any of the other theories I mentioned above -- and there were better observational bases for accepting those than for accepting the existence of a divine authority.  Maxwell's equations were seen as a vindication of aether theory, after all.  It wasn't until much later that they were seen to be independent of aether.

So, in the same way that I say that there is no phlogiston, no caloric, and no aether, I also say there is no god, and I feel not the slightest twinge to qualify that.

[Mike Cl]

im not bothered

i just wonder how someone could make an assumption, if they value evidence, so i question why gnostic atheism exists

Like you, I wondered that distinction myself.  I was an agnostic for most of my life.  But within the last decade it dawned on me that there is evidence against a god governing the universe.  Nature is that evidence.  How could a 'loving' god, interested in justice and rewarding good, have created such a bloody system?  I have no choice but to live as a killer.  Even if I don't ever eat meat, I still have to eat plants.  Plants have life.  So, to live I have to kill--no choice.  But what would be a better way?, I am asked?  Plants don't need to kill--they can live by the energy of the sun or the chemicals from ocean bottom vents.  Why would a loving god make such a system?  I see that as evidence that no such entity exists.  Can't exist. 

[Contemporary Protestant]

apologists would have a field day with that

anyhow, nature being cruel doesnt disprove god, it only raises questions about a loving god

"keep digging" - wilfred (love that show)

[Mike Cl]

apologists would have a field day with that

anyhow, nature being cruel doesnt disprove god, it only raises questions about a loving god

"keep digging" - wilfred (love that show)

First, this is the type of proof that is personal.  I do not expect to change anybody's mind with it.  But it is sound enough for me to move from the agnostic group to the atheistic group. 

A cruel nature (and it really isn't cruel as much as indifferent) does really raise questions about a god, and most certainty a 'loving god'  Explain birth defects in light of a 'loving god.'   

[Contemporary Protestant]

you are crossing into a personal area of mine
i was born with severe birth defects
and i dont blame God, i think it just happens

[Mike Cl]

you are crossing into a personal area of mine
i was born with severe birth defects
and i dont blame God, i think it just happens

Sorry to hear that.  But why not blame god if god created the universe?  He is in charge.  With god in charge things don't just happen--they happen for a reason; a reason that makes no sense that I can fathom.

[Contemporary Protestant]

i think that the universe is chaotic and do not hold a calvinist worldview, i think god could heal me but wont, i dont care, but i wasnt chosen to suffer

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurofibromatosis_type_I

i dont know anything different, so i see wishing to be normal as meaningless

[Mike Cl]

i think that the universe is chaotic and do not hold a calvinist worldview, i think god could heal me but wont, i dont care, but i wasnt chosen to suffer

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurofibromatosis_type_I

i dont know anything different, so i see wishing to be normal as meaningless

You seem to have a very healthy attitude toward your situation.  That's good.

But what of those who did not have that opportunity to make any kind of choice--those born too mangled to live more than a little while?  Or those too insane to have any kind of choice making ability?  Why or how could a loving compassionate god create the possibility of that kind of pain and suffering?  Does not make any kind of sense, logical, reasonable or spiritually. 

Yes, the universe is chaotic--or seems to be.  That is mainly because we understand more about how it works.  And it will become less and less chaotic as we learn more and more about it.

[the_antithesis]

It appears to me that more people are atheist, than there are agnostics. Which doesn't make sense to me, isn't atheism an assumption about something that cannot be known with certainty?
In all honestly, the only people who don't assume things are the nihilists who believe in absolutely nothing, not even the existence of things outside of their sphere of influence

What's a god?

[aitm]

I am of the classical definition of atheist as one who denies the existence of god(s). I also claim for certain that there is no god. No of course many say you cannot claim for certain on something that cannot be known for certain, but I argue that indeed one can claim for certain against ridiculous and incredulous statements.

In my studies (as I have bored many here with before) I have read and followed of the ancient religions and archeology that show religions existed prior to todays religions, I have read and followed the process of animism through tokenism to shamanism to deities through the history of anthropology and have observed it in the cognitive development of children so the idea of how gods can be imagined is readily available to anyone with a brain.

I have seen and read of the ancient structures thousands of years prior to todays religions and understood that humanity was looking for answers, the key being "looking".

I have seen the cave drawings from tens of thousands of years prior to religion even existing and seen the awareness that the ancients had of life and death and how even then they treated the dead with love and respect, long before deities existed.

I have read of the tens of thousands of gods that man has invented and seen that not one single religion has any better grace from their god than the next, to the point that the non-believer has exactly the same probability of success and grace as the believer.

I have read many religious texts and found them to be written for and to morons who willingly, set aside reason and logic to qualm their fear, and for no other reason but for that very fear.

I have seen that nothing, absolutely NOTHING that can be pointed to the works of a god that cannot, or has not, been solved by science or simple common sense.

There is nothing in this world, in any way shape or fashion that requires a god, yet the world can be explained without one.

That everything can be explained without a god, is proof that one does not need a god and thus gods do not exist but for the imaginary and for the fear of those less interested in finding the truth for themselves.

It has been proven beyond a doubt, to those who will take the time to learn, that gods were invented by humans. Nothing suggests otherwise. God(s) do not exist.

[Mike Cl]

I am of the classical definition of atheist as one who denies the existence of god(s). I also claim for certain that there is no god. No of course many say you cannot claim for certain on something that cannot be known for certain, but I argue that indeed one can claim for certain against ridiculous and incredulous statements.

In my studies (as I have bored many here with before) I have read and followed of the ancient religions and archeology that show religions existed prior to todays religions, I have read and followed the process of animism through tokenism to shamanism to deities through the history of anthropology and have observed it in the cognitive development of children so the idea of how gods can be imagined is readily available to anyone with a brain.

I have seen and read of the ancient structures thousands of years prior to todays religions and understood that humanity was looking for answers, the key being "looking".

I have seen the cave drawings from tens of thousands of years prior to religion even existing and seen the awareness that the ancients had of life and death and how even then they treated the dead with love and respect, long before deities existed.

I have read of the tens of thousands of gods that man has invented and seen that not one single religion has any better grace from their god than the next, to the point that the non-believer has exactly the same probability of success and grace as the believer.

I have read many religious texts and found them to be written for and to morons who willingly, set aside reason and logic to qualm their fear, and for no other reason but for that very fear.

I have seen that nothing, absolutely NOTHING that can be pointed to the works of a god that cannot, or has not, been solved by science or simple common sense.

There is nothing in this world, in any way shape or fashion that requires a god, yet the world can be explained without one.

That everything can be explained without a god, is proof that one does not need a god and thus gods do not exist but for the imaginary and for the fear of those less interested in finding the truth for themselves.

It has been proven beyond a doubt, to those who will take the time to learn, that gods were invented by humans. Nothing suggests otherwise. God(s) do not exist.

Yep!!

[Contemporary Protestant]

my original life span was supposed to be 3 years, so i was once considered one of the ones who wouldnt make it
when i was in Africa, in the slums particularly, i met some of the most joyful people, who still believed in God
for that reason, i accept alot of things as just is, i just have a condition, my genes mutated
as for the poor, i blame colonialism and greed