Yes, There are Stupid Atheists

Sean Gangol outlines a few of the reasons I rarely associate with mainstream atheism. Too often they let their cognitive biases dictate their political opinions. In doing so they quickly turn politics into war and arguments into amoral soldiers. Victory for their side then becomes more important than accuracy. This attitude stands in opposition to general methods for good decision-making.

The Atheist Experience Folly

The Nature of God

I rarely post anything about atheism here. I have no particular reasons for avoiding it but my atheism is like my hair or my teeth -- I've had it for a long time and, with reasonable care, I'll have it until I die. However, when I tire of writing about the important questions out there I sometimes fall back on it.

About a month ago, I made a tongue-in-cheek comment on Facebook combining two commonly asserted characteristics of God with the nature of evidence.

---

Assume God is both omniscient and omnipotent

An omniscient god would know what evidence would cause me to believe in it. An omnipotent god would be able to provide me such evidence. But God does not provide me the evidence so:

1. God is not omniscient or
2. God is not omnipotent or
3. God does not want me to believe in It or
4. God does not exist or
5. God is just being an asshole.

---

To which someone replied:

Just to nitpick you forgot a possibility: The point could be for you to believe without proof (best definition of faith i've ever heard) for some reason. Or perhaps God reveals himself to you all the time and you simply miss it.

Just to play white devil's advocate over here

Fair enough but I didn't miss those possibilities so much as I excluded them.

My argument is deductive and belief without any evidence whatsoever (faith alone) would necessarily exclude any such logical process -- Credo quia absurdum! If God has a choice in the matter (It may not) and is truly omnipotent then It would not have to obey any rules at all. Even the rules It insists we humans obey. If God is revealing Itself to me in ways I do not recognize what does that tell me about the nature of God? Not much really except It chooses to not reveal Itself. Which is the point.

The part about God being a asshole was deliberately flippant because, even if I assume the reports are reliable, there really is no reason to assume that God is playing an honest game. Heck! maybe the whole salvation thing is a con and our reward in the afterlife is determined by when we die -- odd numbered souls go to heaven, even numbered souls go to hell. I am not aware of any conception of God that requires It behaves as we humans expect.

Good Muslims?

Amy Alkon, The Advice Goddess comments on an article in MailOnline reporting that,

The widow of a July 7 suicide bomber yesterday launched a High Court bid to be represented at the victims’ inquest - saying she had also suffered the loss of a loved one in the atrocity.

Read the rest of the MailOnline article here: I'm a victim too says the widow of 7/7 bomber, in legal aid claim that could delay inquest

What caught my eye was this comment from someone calling himself "Norsefire".

Considering the status of women under Islam I doubt her dead husband ever discussed this with her but that doesn't matter -- The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim. Especially the incubators.

Amy replies with,

The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim.

That's horrible thinking. We don't win here by emulating the commandments of Islam (to murder people who don't share their beliefs) but by maintaining enlightenment values and protecting our society. The best way to do this is to inform people about what Islam really is. About the two Islams -- the Islam that is a religion, practiced by Muslims who are clueless as to what's really in the Quran, and the Islam that is practiced true to the Quran (commanding the death or conversion of the rest of us), which is totalitarianism masquerading as religion.

I'm pretty sure Norsefire is trolling. I doubt the reference to "V for Vendetta" is coincidental. For those who don't know the story, Norsefire was the name of a political party in the graphic novel written by Alan Moore and illustrated by David Lloyd. In a fictional England, they solved the Muslim problem (along with the Gay problem, the Jewish problem, the Chinese problem, the Atheist problem and few other bêtes noires) with the brutality typical of collectivism.

Nevertheless, a lot of the rhetoric on the Internet does describe the conflict with Islam as a "war". See the Gates of Vienna as an example: "We are in a new phase of a very old war." Which is not an entirely inaccurate description.

I hope Amy is right and this "war" (battle, conflict, whatever) can be kept cold with the fight managed in the information space. However, Islam is not noted for its rationality. There simply has never been an Islamic equivalent to the Western Enlightenment.

Islam did have its own particular cultural and scientific achievments but turned against science in the twelfth century. The influential Muslim theologian Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali in The Incoherence of the Philosophers argued against the very idea of any laws of nature because such laws would limit God. According to al-Ghazzali if I put piece of cotton in a flame it does not burn because of the heat but because God wants it to burn. After al-Ghazzali, there was no more science worth mentioning in Islamic countries so the culture was never forced to question its traditional worldview.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an exceptional and admirable woman who not only abandoned Islam but became an atheist. A double win for sanity. I would be delighted if more Muslims living in the West would abandon their silly Middle Eastern superstitions and embrace apostasy. Since most Western Governments just don't get the high cost of abandoning Islam (or are too pussified to protect them), I would happily contribute to a fund to buy the apostates a gun and training so that each could protect himself (or herself) from the inevitable attempts at murder.

What are the odds of that happening?

Taggers for Christ

This is old news but, given my earlier post entiled "Threeper versus Threeper", it is relevent.

Chrissy Saterfield over at World Net Daily experienced journalistic orgasms over the vandalism of a billboard right before the "Fourth of July weekend" (her words, I call it "Independence Day").

Just when I start believing there is no hope for our country I get a little reminder from my God that all is not lost. It was reported June 29 that a billboard sign sponsored by a North Carolina atheist organization had been vandalized. The ad reads, "One Nation Indivisible." It seems someone didn't think the sign was an accurate depiction of our Pledge of Allegiance, so the vandals inserted "Under God" with spray paint – and I couldn't be more relieved. It's nice to know that I am not alone in my beliefs and that some people are still willing to stand on the right side of truth.

Of course she inserts the obligatory disclaimer that she would never encourage such a thing (Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink).

Never would I encourage vandalism, but in this case I think I'll let it slide. Atheists have been vandalizing my beliefs for years, so it's about time the shoe was on the other foot.

If her beliefs are so fragile that a few words are the equivalent to vandalism then the logical side of Ms. Saterfield must be tempted to check her premises. Fortunately for the survival of Christendom, her belief system insulates her from the temptation of thinking.

In the final analysis, there is no Commandment against vandalism I guess there is no reason for Ms. Saterfield to condemn the actions of her co-religionist.

My dose of honesty this week: I am not happy that vandalism seems to be the only way to get an atheist's attention. I'm happy that I can count on other Christians to stand up for themselves and for Christians everywhere. It gives me hope.

OTOH, do I need to care what Chrissy Saterfield thinks? She seem to do it very rarely.

Onward Christian taggers, skulking in the night.
With your holy spray paint those billboard you will smite.
The royal Master Krylon, leads against the foe;
forward into battle see God's graffiti go!

H/T to The Secular Right

Threeper versus Threeper?

Over at Sipsey Street in the comments to the entry entitled The messy interface of church, state and the First Amendment in NM an anonymous reader writes at 3:43 PM:

Not to worry. We know how to deal with atheists.

I have little doubt that a lot of christians would happily see every atheist and probably more than a few of their fellow believers who do it "wrong" dead and "sardine packed". Twice in my life I've been threatened by christians who mistook "atheist" to mean "pacifist" or "unarmed". In both cases the appearance of Messrs. Smith and Wesson convinced them they were wrong on both counts,

Maybe they weren't quite ready to meet Jeebus.

Assuming some JBT doesn't do the job for you, any believers tempted to simplify things for your god by ridding the planet of this pesky atheist had better plan on backshooting or bushwacking me. Otherwise bring lots of friends and plenty of ammunition because -- win, lose or draw -- it will be a long fucking day. I'm already planning to hold a few cases of ammo in reserve just in case you go as stupid as the shit some of you talk.

Mike Vanderboegh writing as Dutchman6 ofers:

Anonymous said:"Not to worry. We know how to deal with atheists."

Mac Bigelow sez:

"What? Force them to love God or kill them? Sounds a lot like your in the same boat as the Muslims to me. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is only for devout christians or more to the point catholics?"

My preference is to annoy them to distraction until they come to Jesus. Tickling is sometimes permitted. No one expects the Spanish Inquisition. -- Mike

I hope you're right, Mr. Vanderboegh, and your fellow believers will not indulge in a bit of cleansing. In which happy case I remind you that, "One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." Tickling will not be required.

From Your Lips to God's -- err...

Amy Alkon blogs about Heather Mac Donald On Glenn Beck's Faith. One responder calling himself "Donny Pauson" writes in his reply, "Atheists have just as much faith as 'believers'."

Amy responds with,

Um, no. I require evidence before I'll believe in something.

Because I haven't personally investigated a particular thing doesn't mean there's a lack of evidence for its existence.

If you show me that you've found evidence there's a god, I'd be happy to believe.

Do you believe that there's a giant purple gorilla on your roof right now eating your children? Because there's as much evidence for that as there is for god.

Science does not require faith. Science requires evidence, and scientists look to see where evidence is lacking -- it's the foundation of science, seeking the evidence-based truth.

Underlying this is a deeper epistimological question. Does theism use or require a different concept of evidence from atheism?

Theism is based on belief and belief defines what counts as evidence. For example, when confronted with the question of the origin of the universe the theist will take the lack of any definitive answer from science as evidence for a god. Usually his particular god. In contrast, as an atheist I do not use my lack of knowledge about how the universe got started as evidence that there is no god. In fact, I don’t use it as evidence for anything. It is just a puzzle to be solved.

This is more than an alternative set of assumptions. It is a whole different approach to evidence.

The user called "Crid" asks,

"How come the particular stupidity has become so popular on this blog in recent years?"

That's just a word game. The word "faith" has different meanings in different contexts. For example faith that the sun will come up tomorrow is a different thing than faith in an invisible, omnipotent entity that creates whole universes with a word and is intensely interested in my sex life.

The first is a result of experience combined with a belief that the universe is not perverse and the rules don't change arbitrarily. This is the faith that C.S Lewis (IIRC) referred to as the virtue by which a man holds to reasoned ideas even during moments of irrationality. The second is an example of a trusting belief in a transcendent reality and/or in a supreme being and what role She/He/It has in the order of things.

Between the extremes of the painfully obvious and the painfully theological there are categories that are less easily divided and it is in those gaps that someone can find a god.

God versus Smith and Wesson

News Article in the UK Times Online:

Toddler kills cousin with father's gun

The toddler son of a US police officer shot and killed his three year old cousin with the gun his father had left in the family car.

Police were called to a house in Louisiana at 2.30 pm local time on Thursday after the three-year-old boy gunned down his cousin when they were playing in their front garden.
More

In the comments, someone identifying himself as "harish lathia" wrote:

Dear all American Brothers and Sisters

Please get rid of these guns.
You are a very intelligent and rich/ educated people, please TRUST IN GOD, not guns.
Do not fear, but analyse yourselves and you will see that your essence is a spark of divinity as you are human beings.

With this knowledge and your other endowments you can lead us to a better world.

You do not need guns.

Harish Lathia

If any one of mankind's gods exists -- a big if in my opinion -- It doesn't seem to care much about human beings. So, even if God exists, I am still on my own.

Self defense is a natural function as fundamental to the human animal as eating, sleeping and excreting. It cannot be delegated. Turning the other cheek and giving the criminal what he wants is a fool's game. You may believe it will buy you an eternity in Paradise but in the real world it will get you hurt or killed.

In the Movie version of Watchmen, the character Rorshach tells a prison psychiatrist about an early case involving a kidnapped girl and her killer. He summed up the lesson of that case thusly:

You see, Doctor, God didn't kill that little girl. Fate didn't butcher her and destiny didn't feed her to those dogs. If God saw what any of us did that night he didn't seem to mind. From then on I knew... God doesn't make the world this way. We do.

Good advice. In any encounter with a criminal, given a choice between trusting in God or trusting in a Smith and Wesson revolver, I'll pick the revolver. I have evidence it works.

H/T to David Codrea

Atheists in the Three Percent

In a recent posting on leverguns forum the question was asked:

Hmmmmm,... so, you think Christians are forcing Atheists to financially support Christianity?

Yes, I do.

Every time tax money is used to support or promote religious belief, the collectivists are stealing from me to support a belief I do not hold to. That's an aspect of socialism and I want no part of it.

In the Big Picture, there is a reality the God talkers had better face if they want this to end well. A significant minority of the so called "three percent" are atheists. Another minority are pagans. I know of a few gays and some Jews in there too. Get over it.

The only ideological purity test I have for an ally in in the fight against the collectivists is a belief in the rights and liberties that were codified by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and that these rights extend to all sapients regardless of race, creed, color, religion, sexual orientation, etc. I don't give a crap if you're an anarchist, libertarian, atheist or Catholic. Even Baptists are welcome.

You can save your ideological carping for the day after the collectivist boot is shoved back up their own arses or you can look in the mirror to see why you lost.