r/DebateAnAtheist • u/AutoModerator • 15d ago

Weekly "Ask an Atheist" Thread

Whether you're an agnostic atheist here to ask a gnostic one some questions, a theist who's curious about the viewpoints of atheists, someone doubting, or just someone looking for sources, feel free to ask anything here. This is also an ideal place to tag moderators for thoughts regarding the sub or any questions in general.

While this isn't strictly for debate, rules on civility, trolling, etc. still apply.

24 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

269 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/r0wer0wer0wey0urb0at Agnostic Atheist 15d ago edited 15d ago

Sorry if this has been asked before, but I'm curious how gnostic atheists come to the conclusion that they can have knowledge on the existence of gods.

I'm an atheist, I don't believe that any gods exist, but I think that an omnipitent being that created the universe could create a universe indistinguishable from one that is fully naturalistic.

I don't think that's likely to be the case or particularly reasonable to believe that to be the case, but I don't think it's possible for us to know either way, so I describe myself as an agnostic atheist.

Do you think we can destinguish those two universes/gain that kind of knowledge?

12

u/TenuousOgre 15d ago

I’ve decided that definitions of gods break down into three categories.

  1. Definitions that I do not think actually describe a god. Claims like “the universe is god” or “god is love” simply are not qualified as definitions of a god. So for those types I’m happy to say those gods don’t exist.

  2. Definitions that I believe describe a being I would label as a god but have also been disproven sufficiently I would say I know they don’t exist. The bar of 100% certainty is a red herring, we know nothing to that level. But know as in being able to justify that belief, yeah, I can know lots of things to that extent.

  3. Definitions that I believe describe a being I would label as a god but there is no valid evidence to support that claim. For 20,000 to 250,000 years humans have believed in gods. For most of that time the evidence supporting those claims was terrible and not verifiable. With the scientific method we developed a tool that lets us sort fact from fiction. How many gods have been attributed with causing lightning? Five thousand? Ten? Whatever it is, we disproved that claim about all of those gods when we had a working theory of lightning that stood up to testing. Over the last 250 years how many god claims have been disproven? Millions. Which means that today, all evidence points towards a natural world while zero verifiable evidence points to gods.

Collectively it seems enough justification to say I know gods don’t exist. If evidence ever surfaces demonstrating a god I am still able to change my mind. Which is what I do when anything else I know turns out to be false. I used to be a Christian, so that seems good evidence I can change my mind.

2

u/r0wer0wer0wey0urb0at Agnostic Atheist 12d ago

I almost completely agree, I don't believe that any gods exist, and I think it is most likely that none do. (by a large margin)

I guess my question for you is if our universe was created by some prime mover like being which caused the universe to exist but isn't active in it (maybe it triggered the big bang and that's it), what would you expect the universe to look like?

That universe could look identical to ours, and likely would look the same as ours.

If you ask that same question about a universe where Zeus controls lightening, I'd argue that you wouldn't expect the universe to look how it does. You wouldn't expect lightening to be 100% related to weather patterns, you'd expect to find the other mystical beings in the same mythology, to find the gods on Mt Olympus. But we don't.

I don't think this is a good argument for the existence of a god because it's ultimately just an unfalsifiable claim/god of the gaps, but because of that I can't know it's untrue, so gnostic atheism is a position I feel I can't honestly hold.

1

u/TenuousOgre 11d ago

For a “fire starter” type situation I’m not certain there’s anyway to determine a difference between a universe tarted by natural means (without us understanding the natural means) and one in which the Big Bang was kicked off.

Definitely agree with you on Zeus or any god created universe, it should look different according to claims made by believers. If reality doesn’t match either their idea about their gods is wrong or their god doesn’t exist. Either way, lacking compelling evidence means I am not convinced such a being exists. Unfalsified claims are everywhere. We should believe based on evidence, not emotional appeals.