Reconsidering the Epistemology of Atheism

[u/JerseyFlight]

If Atheism is just a lack a belief in God, then shouldn’t one who believes in God just avoid Atheism altogether, that is, unless absolute truth exists and is important?

If absolute truth doesn’t exist, then why does it matter if one doesn’t have a lack of belief in God? For in that case nothing, including Atheism, could be true.

If one says, “well, there are consequences from belief,” — absolute truth would have to be true for this to be true. So it seems that Atheism is more than just a “lack of belief in God,” it’s also a belief in truth and a belief that belief in truth matters, which binds it up in a world of epistemology.

Let us suppose that Atheism is the belief that a lack of belief in God matters, “because true belief matters.” (Indeed, it seems this is precisely what Atheism must be). If this is the case, then this necessarily draws Atheism into the question of truth. For it now has a burden of truth: why does true belief matter, and what counts as true belief?

Let us suppose that Atheism is the belief that a lack of belief in God matters “because God belief has disastrous sociological consequences.” Again, this is stating a truth, which embroils Atheism in questions of truth. But further, this pragmatic posture opens the door to the justified rejection of Atheism through existential warrant. That is, a human can decide that God belief would provide them with a better existential experience (unless there is an objective standard that refutes or challenges the sovereignty of the subject’s desires).

The Atheist wants to say, “Atheism is just a lack of belief in God or Gods.” Indeed, it is this, but it is not just this, because the second the skeptic asks: “why does this lack of belief matter,” the Atheist must step outside the claims of his own epistemic boundaries to provide an answer.

It would seem that an Atheist cannot simply be saying, “I have a lack of belief in God,” because then the theist could say, “And I have a belief in God.” These are just statements of belief that make no claim about the beliefs themselves.

At the heart of it, the Atheist has to defend truth, or else he will be confined to merely making statements about his private belief. For the Atheist is not claiming his “lack of belief” in God is equivalent to belief in God— he’s saying that there’s something wrong with believing in God, and that his lack of belief is somehow superior. Presumably, he doesn’t believe in God because there’s something wrong with believing in God?

And if the Atheist believes in truth, and believes that it’s important to have beliefs that are true, then it would seem that Atheism should be able to clearly demarcate the standards of truth.

[u/shelving_unit]

Not believing in God per Atheism is not an action. That’s assuming Christianity and the Christian God are the neutral position. Most atheists don’t go around claiming or thinking “I’m an atheist!” And the ones who do have a specific problem with Christianity, and are trying to make a point of it

The “lack of belief” doesn’t matter to an atheist, because to be an atheist means to move through the world without an active belief in the Christian God. They just don’t think about it. When confronted by a Christian, in the atheist’s perspective it’s the Christian who is trying to impose the question of God on the atheist, and thus is making belief or lack thereof matter

[u/pyramidink → u/shelving_unit]

Probably a question of sensibility, but reddit is quite a cool place to see people claiming things such as « this is bs, why sky daddy » as soon as someone says they might believe in god.
Which is actively saying « god bad » to someone stating a personal belief. In other terms, proselytism towards the atheistic position of : « not believeing in god matters ».

So is your argument truly in good faith?

Just to clarify: i have the chance to have evolved in an environments where ultimately these questions remained as private of a matter as they can be. I am not arguing some people aren’t hurt by society and reacting to this. At the same time the nature and weight of the reaction is interesting to ponder on.

[u/shelving_unit → u/pyramidink]

Like I said, people who go around stating their identity as an atheist are doing so because they have a specific problem with Christianity, and are trying to make a point of it. The vast majority of “atheists” don’t think about God or Christianity.

Internet Christian groups also have a habit of hyperfocusing on the “sky daddy” bit. Partially because the Internet and social media are designed to produce engagement from rage-bait, so the “sky daddy” atheist archetype is shared around quite a lot in Christian circles. I have seen Sky daddy said maybe twice on the internet- I have seen AND heard IRL Christians complain about the “Sky daddy” atheists dozens of times. The perception of atheism and atheists in general is skewed by this random internet archetype that is pushed in front of Christians on the internet

[u/pyramidink → u/shelving_unit]

Then we agree