Atheism and Examples

Atheism is the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. Theism is the affirmation of the divine and often seeks to prove its existence. Agnosticism is the position that leaves the question of God’s existence open or unanswerable. This ongoing debate raises questions about how to best define each term. A proper analysis must examine the justifications for atheism. This analysis must also determine the most adequate definition of atheism itself. This article will therefore explore common definitions, offer clearer formulations, and consider key arguments for and against atheism.

Atheism as Rejection of Religious Beliefs

The Monotheistic Core

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam share a central belief in one God. Adherents of these faiths believe this God created the universe from nothing. They believe this God holds absolute sovereignty over all creation. They believe human beings are dependent on this power and find meaning by accepting God’s commands.

The Scope of Atheist Rejection

Atheism exists in many forms, but all forms reject this set of beliefs. Atheism, however, rejects all belief in spiritual beings. This rejection extends beyond the Abrahamic faiths. It includes the beliefs of African religions, the gods of ancient Greece and Rome, and the concepts of Hinduism and Buddhism. A general definition of atheism is the denial of any god or gods. A broader definition of atheism is the rejection of all religious belief. This simple characterization, however, requires closer examination.

Atheism and Theism

The Problem with Defining “Theism”

The definition of atheism as the opposite of theism is inadequate. Some defenders of faith do not consider themselves defenders of theism. Their complex views challenge a simple opposition between belief and unbelief.

Example: Paul Tillich’s Nontheistic God

Theologian Paul Tillich provides a key example. Tillich viewed the God of traditional theism as an idol. He refused to define God as a being, even a supreme one. God, for Tillich, was “being-itself,” the foundation of all existence and meaning. Tillich’s view, while complex, has been highly influential in modern theology. His position shows that one can reject theism while still affirming a belief in God.

Fideism and the Rejection of Reason

Other believers reject the need for evidence or rational proof entirely. This position is known as fideism. Thinkers like Søren Kierkegaard argue that faith is a personal, passionate commitment. They believe this commitment does not require, and should not seek, rational justification. Atheism, in response, rejects this abandonment of reason. It critiques fideism not by disproving a specific claim but by upholding the standard that beliefs should be based on evidence and logical argument.

Implicit and Explicit Atheism

A further distinction clarifies the nature of non-belief. Implicit atheism is the absence of belief without a conscious rejection of it. A person who has never been exposed to the concept of God is an implicit atheist. Explicit atheism is the conscious and deliberate rejection of belief in gods. Most philosophical discussions of atheism focus on this explicit form. This distinction is crucial for defining atheism with precision. It separates the simple absence of belief from a considered philosophical stance.

The Burden of Proof and Agnosticism

The Evidentialist Challenge

Modern atheist arguments often center on the burden of proof. This principle states that the person making a positive claim bears the responsibility for providing evidence. The person who does not accept the claim has no such burden. The atheist, from this perspective, does not accept the claim “God exists” due to a lack of sufficient evidence. This position is often called “weak” or “negative” atheism. It is a stance of non-belief rather than a direct assertion of God’s non-existence.

Strong Atheism and Agnosticism

“Strong” or “positive” atheism, in contrast, makes a definitive claim: “God does not exist.” This position does accept a burden of proof to support its assertion. The distinction between these forms clarifies the relationship between atheism and agnosticism. A weak atheist (one who lacks belief) can also be an agnostic (one who does not claim to know for certain). The terms are not mutually exclusive; they answer different questions. One addresses belief (“I do not believe”), while the other addresses knowledge (“I do not know”). This framework reframes atheism from a simple denial to a position of rational, skeptical inquiry.

The Argument from the Problem of Evil

The Logical Challenge to Theism

The Problem of Evil is a central argument against the existence of the theistic God. The argument highlights a logical conflict between God’s traditional attributes and the reality of suffering. Theism defines God as omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), and omnibenevolent (all-good). An all-powerful God could prevent evil. An all-knowing God would be aware of evil. An all-good God would wish to eliminate evil. The existence of widespread, intense suffering therefore suggests that such a God does not exist.

Theistic Responses: Theodicy

Theologians and philosophers respond to this problem with a theodicy. A theodicy is an argument that seeks to justify God’s permission of evil. The free will defense is a very common theodicy. This argument posits that evil is a necessary byproduct of genuine human freedom. The soul-making theodicy offers another explanation. This view proposes that suffering is necessary for spiritual and moral development. Atheists counter that these justifications do not account for gratuitous suffering, such as natural disasters or childhood diseases, which serve no obvious purpose.

Other Arguments for Atheism

The Argument from Incoherence

Another line of reasoning focuses on the concept of God itself. This argument claims that the attributes assigned to God are logically incoherent. For example, some philosophers question how a being can be both perfectly just and perfectly merciful. Others ask how a timeless, unchanging being can interact with a temporal, changing world. These arguments conclude that the concept of the theistic God is contradictory. A being with contradictory properties, by definition, cannot exist.

The Argument from Nonbelief

The argument from nonbelief, or divine hiddenness, offers a different challenge. The argument states that an all-loving God would want a personal relationship with all people. Such a relationship requires belief in God’s existence. The existence of sincere, non-resistant nonbelievers is therefore evidence against such a God. An all-loving God, this argument contends, would make his existence sufficiently clear to all who are open to believing. The fact that many are not convinced, through no fault of their own, suggests this God does not exist.

Atheism and Morality

The Divine Command Objection

A common objection to atheism relates to its perceived lack of a moral foundation. Theistic systems often ground morality directly in divine command. This view, however, faces the classical Euthyphro dilemma. The dilemma asks whether an action is good because God commands it, or if God commands it because it is already good. The first option makes morality arbitrary, while the second suggests a standard of goodness independent of God.

Secular Ethical Frameworks

Atheists, in response, propose secular foundations for ethics. These foundations include humanism, consequentialism, and deontology. Humanism centers morality on human flourishing and dignity. Consequentialism judges an action by its outcomes, such as promoting happiness or reducing suffering. Deontology establishes moral duties based on rational principles. These secular systems derive moral values from reason, empathy, and a shared interest in social well-being.

The Social and Historical Context

Atheism in History

Explicit atheism was historically a rare and dangerous position. The European Enlightenment of the 18th century fostered the growth of skepticism and critical inquiry. Thinkers like Baron d’Holbach and Denis Diderot were among the first to openly advocate for atheistic worldviews. The 20th and 21st centuries have seen a significant increase in public non-belief, particularly in secular democracies.

The New Atheism Movement

A movement known as “New Atheism” emerged in the early 2000s. This movement is characterized by a direct and public critique of religion. Figures like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens argued that religious faith is not only irrational but often harmful. Their work brought atheistic arguments into mainstream public discourse on an unprecedented scale.

Conclusion

Atheism is more than a simple denial of God. It represents a diverse range of philosophical positions and arguments. Important distinctions exist between implicit and explicit, weak and strong atheism. Its arguments are grounded in logic, evidence, and principles of skeptical inquiry. A complete picture of non-belief requires understanding these definitions, arguments, and their historical context.