First of all, I have more in common with atheists than religious people, so my intention isn’t to come here and attack, I just want to hear your opinions. Maybe I’m wrong, I’d like to hear from you if I am. I’m just expressing here my perception of the movement and not actually what I consider to be facts.

My issue with atheism is that I think it establishes the lack of a God or gods as the truth. I do agree that the concept of a God is hard to believe logically, specially with all the incoherent arguments that religions have had in the past. But saying that there’s no god with certainty is something I’m just not comfortable with. Science has taught us that being wrong is part of the process of progress. We’re constantly learning things we didn’t know about, confirming theories that seemed insane in their time. I feel like being open to the possibilities is a healthier mindset, as we barely understand reality.

In general, atheism feels too close minded, too attached to the current facts, which will probably be obsolete in a few centuries. I do agree with logical and rational thinking, but part of that is accepting how little we really know about reality, how what we considered truth in the past was wrong or more complex than we expected

I usually don’t believe there is a god when the argument comes from religious people, because they have no evidence, but they could be right by chance.

  • bramkaandorp@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    I personally never said that I think there definitely is no god, so that part is a straw man argument.

    It is also not a requirement of atheism, as has been explained to you multiple times. Insisting that your definition is the correct one doesn’t make it so.

    Also, why is it not begging the question to say that it is out of our reach?

    You say it’s like blind people and colors, but that analogy doesn’t work, because there are people who have seen colors, and can explain how colors work. Do you have a similar example for gods? Are there people who have “seen” gods, so to speak?

    • platypus_plumba@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      11·
      2 months ago

      It seemed to me like you “concluded” there is no god. You even asked if it was unreasonable to conclude that. Maybe it’s semantics but concluding something seems like there’s a degree of certainty. Anyways, I have no issue if you decide to clarify that you don’t really believe there isn’t a god.

      If you read where people said that not all atheists believe there is no god, you probably also read that I said “OK, I didn’t know there were different types of atheists, I’m only talking about the ones that believe there is no god”. Then, I’m not sure why you’d point that out now. My position is clear, I’m only talking about people who really believe there are no creators. For me, that’s just that, a belief. I think we shouldn’t believe matters we can’t grasp, one way or the other.

      An analogy is an analogy, it doesn’t have to be a perfect analogy, the idea can be understood. In that analogy all of humanity is the blind person. We may be able to see the colors in the future once we gain more knowledge and understanding… Until then, we’re just guessing. I’d prefer if people didn’t guess, I’d prefer if people had no issue accepting their ignorance and their relevance in the universe.

      “I don’t believe there is a God because humans haven’t gathered the evidence of it”. That just seems too egocentric to me, as if humans had the universe figured out.

      “I believe there is no god” and “I believe there is a god” seem just as likely to me based on what humans understand.

      • bramkaandorp@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        “I believe there is a god” seems less likely, given the evidence. It only seems equally likely if you arbitrarily put god above everything else. Something someone only does if they think it is important to keep the idea alive.

        • platypus_plumba@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          11·
          2 months ago

          Again, we don’t really understand the nature of the universe. We barely understand some of its rules, probably in a very incomplete or scoped way. Whatever you choose to believe in this matter is just a guess.

          One day we’ll probably understand the inner workings, we’ll probably be able to simulate the actual origin, we’ll be able to figure out all the interactions. Until that day arrives, if it ever does, we should just stop playing this guessing game and accept we just don’t know.

          Is it really hard to just say “I don’t really know, believing anything about matters I don’t really understand isn’t productive, let’s focus on actually gathering knowledge instead of fighting about who’s got the best guess”?

          • bramkaandorp@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            Yes, it is.

            If we don’t see evidence, then clinging onto the concept just because people have believed in it in the past doesn’t make sense.

            Because if not for that, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Because we wouldn’t have a concept of there possibly, maybe being a god in the first place.