Tuesday, 17 April 2012

  • Why I Love Atheists

    [This is reposted as part of our Best-Of Revelife Week. It was originally posted on October 30, 2009.]

    "An atheist, like a Christian, holds that we can know whether or not there is a God. The Christian holds that we can know there is a God; the atheist, that we can know there is not." --Bertrand Russell

    I really do love atheists, you know.  Atheism, next to paganism, has to be my favorite non-Christian belief system.

    Because at the heart of it, atheists care.

    They think that it matters whether there is or isn't a God.  They think that this question is important.  And while they and I come to two very different answers to that question, we are kin in that we come to answers.  In a world that tells us "all religions and belief systems are equally valid" or "it doesn't matter what you believe, as long as you're true to it," both atheists and theists scream "It matters!"

    A prime illustration is G.K. Chesterton's little parable The Ball and the Cross, which I highly recommend.  It tells the story of Turnbull, publisher and editor of an atheistic newspaper who tries to fight against the dominant "Christian" elements of Victorian England, and yet cannot get a rise out of the general public because no-one cares enough.

    "It was in vain that he cried with an accusing energy that the Bishop of London was paid £12,000 a year for pretending to believe that the whale swallowed Jonah. It was in vain that he hung in conspicuous places the most thrilling scientific calculations about the width of the throat of a whale. Was it nothing to them all they that passed by?  ...He had said the worst thing that could be said; and it seemed accepted and ignored like the ordinary second best of the politicians. Every day his blasphemies looked more glaring, and every day the dust lay thicker upon them."

    After years of being so ignored, the first person who treats Turnbull's atheism with a "real respect and seriousness"--the first person to even read Turnbull's articles all the way through--is MacIan, a fiercely devout Catholic from the backwoods of Scotland, new to London and not yet jaded in matters of religious belief.  ("What is the good of words if they aren't important enough to quarrel over?" he asks.)  MacIan is so incensed by what he reads on the newsprint in Turnbull's window that he smashes the window, kicks his way into the office of The Atheist and challenges Turnbull to a duel, to which Turnbull enthusiastically agrees (thrilled at last to have someone who actually listens, someone who is actually angry with his ideas).

    The two men are hampered in their efforts to fight their duel, however--firstly because duels are illegal, but also because every person they encounter tries to talk them out of it. "Religion is--a--too personal a matter... The most religious people are not those who talk about it," says one.  "...You ought to be more broadminded," says another.  And (while I won't spoil the ending for you), as the two men flee from place to place throughout England searching for a quiet place to have their duel, they find that they are quite coming to like each other.

    It is that which I love about atheists.  They think that these questions of reality or existence are worth fighting for, worth arguing over.  They think that it matters whether God is or is not.

    Those who tell me that every religion/belief system is the same, or that every religion/belief system is just as good as the others, are making a value claim.  Because if it is true that all religions and belief systems are equally valid, it would only be true if they were equally worthless, equally meaningless.  When one belief claims that the Good is found by detaching oneself from the needs and desires of the body, and another belief claims that the Good is found by plunging in and changing the world for the better, and another belief claims that the Good is found by isolating oneself from other people, how can they all be true?  When one claims that God is pleased if we behave and follow his laws, and another claims that God is pleased if we admit that we haven't behaved and throw ourselves on his mercy, and another claims that God doesn't really care what we do, and another claims that God doesn't exist and we shouldn't be fixated on pleasing a nonexistent figment at the expense of humanity--how can these all be true?  If all belief systems are equally valid, equally true, then "true" means little more than "what makes me happy."  (And that in and of itself is a truth-claim.)  If each religion and belief system is only as good as all the others, then they are meaningless, and the question of whether there is or is not such a thing as a god (and what God/gods are like if there is) simply isn't important enough to bother over.

    But Atheism says, "God/gods/deity do not exist."  It makes a clear statement regarding the validity of other belief structures; it uncategorically states that belief structures which contradict its own are wrong, because the universe cannot be contradictory (God cannot exist and not-exist at the same time).  And by making such a claim, it places importance on the issue: the question of whether there is such a thing as a deity not only can be answered, but should.

    So while I disagree with their answer, I love atheists for answering.  I respect and admire their stance.  Because, in answering, they acknowledge the importance of the question--which is far more than most people do.

    What are your thoughts on atheists? Does this post change your opinions  ?

Comments (13)

  • Nous_Apeiron@xanga

    I must have missed this one while my laptop was broken and I couldn't afford to fix it.  Good stuff.

  • arenfro@xanga

    I've always felt this way.  Good post--I remember it the first time, too.

  • blazingtyphoon02@xanga

    Don't know if it was the best place to start, but I first started "exposing" myself to Internet atheists on the Yahoo! Answers Religion & Spirituality section. I think all the people I met on there shaped, not necessarily my beliefs, but how I arrive at the conclusions that I do. That is what I respect most about (most) atheists: because they don't have stories or tales to fall back on, they rely on logic and reasoning to reach their conclusions.

    Though I'm not an atheist (I'm actually a theist, but my philosophy/"religion" is rather eclectic), I actually find myself siding with atheists more almost purely because of the logic they use, carefully avoiding common fallacies in argument. From exposing myself to "atheistic arguments" I've come to respect the parts of my beliefs that are fact and those of which are merely speculation.


    This, of course, ignores all those mean-spirited people (not just atheists) who'd rather insult than discuss.
  • beforedawn@xanga

    actually no... i choose to walk without a crutch... 

  • sometimestheycomebackanyway@xanga

    Giving credit to atheists for caring about whether or not there is a God is like giving a banker credit for caring about money.

    Giving atheists credit for coming up with a different answer is like giving a students credit for coming up with different answers on a simple math problem. The OP is advocating the position that the truth doesn't matter.

    Rationality, justice and virtue all demand that we value the truth.

  • Ooglick@xanga

    I like that an Atheist will bring up the tough questions in discussion. Religion SHOULD be questioned. It helps us to grow. Also, as I have perhaps stated before, I don't want a God that crumbles under scrutiny. I want one that is too big for us to find all the answers to.

  • OutOfTheAshes@xanga

    @sometimestheycomebackanyway@xanga - A student who attempts to answer an essay question on one of my tests may get partial credit, even if their conclusion is off.  A student who leaves the question blank will get no credit.  That is the difference I am trying to highlight.

  • sometimestheycomebackanyway@xanga

    @OutOfTheAshes@xanga - Giving atheists partial credit because they "tried" is very condescending. They do not think of themselves as your student or the student of any Christian for that matter.

    I give atheists a big fat ZERO because they are dead wrong. 

    That's the unvarnished truth which out of respect for all humanity, Christians are obliged to preach for mercy's sake if nothing else.
  • OutOfTheAshes@xanga

    @sometimestheycomebackanyway@xanga - I'm not saying that atheists get partial credit, I'm applauding them for attempting an answer to a question that so many others ignore.

  • blazingtyphoon02@xanga

    @sometimestheycomebackanyway@xanga - Saying any group of people is "dead wrong" kills the discussion and does nothing for the sake of intellectual development. 


    I may not entirely agree with any religion in particular, but it's still interesting to learn about other people's beliefs. It's as if you didn't even read OP's post. OP respects the fact that atheists are willing to think about and discuss the questions regarding religion. I don't even know where you got the claim that "OP is advocating the position that the truth doesn't matter."
    Throwing in random similes to reach a strange conclusion doesn't help much either.
  • shpadoinkle12@xanga

    I consider myself an atheist, and I did enjoy this post, but I disagree slightly with the idea that atheists know that there is no higher power. It comes down to theism (referring to belief) versus gnosticism (referring to knowledge).

    Many atheists wouldn't claim to have absolute knowledge of a lack of a higher power, but for various reasons, we believe that there is none. A more honest name for this type of person would be an agnostic atheist, although many would probably just refer to themselves as atheists. Sure, you will find gnostic atheists every once in a while, but in my experience, they're pretty rare. Like the idea of Russel's teapot, most atheists will admit that it's impossible to prove a negative.

    Sorry to get into semantics...otherwise, great post!

  • Crossed_Out_Name@xanga

    That Bertrand Russell quote very badly misrepresents atheism, which, if you love us so much, you might wish to avoid. Most atheists do not believe in gods. They do NOT believe in the absence of gods. It's a very important distinction, as the latter is almost as absurd as any religion. I don't know how it's lost on so many people.

    But you're right, myself and plenty other atheists certainly think the issue is important. It is very much worth arguing against billions of people wasting immeasurable time and money on such an unfounded, divisive, dehumanizing, very very bad idea. I don't respect it, and I don't respect you for it. Bad ideas are not exempt from criticism by having a religious branding. So yes, it is important, and I'll keep arguing even if there's just one lunatic insisting, without any sense of arrogance or foolishness, that he has a personal relationship with the invisible master of the universe.

  • When_We_Were_Both_Cats@xanga

    @sometimestheycomebackanyway@xanga -"
    Rationality, justice and virtue all demand that we value the truth."


    I agree - and that's why Religion is notorious for getting truth so dead-wrong. Dogma, hierarchy, unquestionable authority, faith claims, indisputable doctrine, et cetera, are all staples of religion and theology, and they are all obstacles to discovering reality.
  • Sign in to Comment

  • Give eProps (?)

About the Author

Who recommended?