(By a net-friend, Chris Ho-Stuart)

I decided in 1996 to add a brief personal introduction to this essay.

I am often mistaken for a Christian. The people I love best in the world are Christians. I was for many years a Christian myself. With the growth of the net, some people who know me personally may read this and will be surprised to find that I do not consider myself a Christian.

I am not evangelical about atheism: I am quite happy to discuss the matter, but only in friendly circumstances where people engaged in discussion are willing to try and see things from an unfamiliar perspective, and to accept with good will the existence and continuation of unfamiliar perspectives.

Please do not email me with the intent of “converting” me.

But if you are fellow lover of good-will even in diversity, and if you are interested in some of my abstract thoughts on the nature and existence of God, you are more than welcome to proceed and read this essay.

Why I am a Strong Atheist

——————————————————————————–

What is a strong atheist? A strong atheist, as defined in the FAQ “Introduction to Atheism”, is someone who does not merely lack belief in god, but believes that god does not exist.

The provisional nature of belief for a thinking person. I do not have a fanatical unwillingness to consider the possibility of being wrong, nor do I adopt a position of “faith” taken independently of reasoning. My assertion is not dogma.

I would prefer to say “I think that god does not exist” rather than “I believe that god does not exist”, in order to emphasize the provisional nature of any conclusions I make about the world. I try to be always open to new evidence that I am wrong on any matter.

As a simple analogy, consider the matter of the dodo; an extinct bird. I think that dodos do not exist; I accept the evidence that they are extinct; I am quite certain on this matter. This is not fanatical dogmatism, but a reasonable conclusion on the basis of evidence — which will immediately be revised on the unexpected discovery of a small population of living dodos. In the same way, my position with respect to god or anything else is provisional.

The analogy with the dodo is limited. The matter of the existence of god is not anything like so simple. The statement “dodos are extinct” is unambiguous. The statement “god does not exist” is far more vague. My assent to the first statement is uncontroversial; my assent to the second is more problematic; and the remainder of this post attempts to explain why I consider it reasonable.

What is “god” anyway? If people are to understand my assertion “god does not exist” they must first understand what I mean by “god”.

I understand a “god” to be an entity that interacts with the physical world but is to some extent transcendent of the physical laws of the universe to which humans are subject. A “god” is in some sense conscious or intelligent.

This is still fairly nebulous, and so here are illustrative examples:

a.. A Deist may believe in a “god” who created the universe, but has been uninvolved with it since then. If the Deist makes no further assertions about this creator, then it might be no more than a quantum fluctuation in a meta-universe. It is merely confusing to call such a fluctuation “god”, and I am agnostic with respect to such assertions.

b.. A Deist may go further, and claim that the creator was conscious and that the creation of the universe was a deliberate act. This does involve a “god” according to my understanding, and I think that the universe was not the result of a conscious deliberate act.

c.. A Taoist believes in a natural flow to the universe; and seeks harmony with this flow. As far as I am aware, a Taoist does not attribute intelligence or consciousness to the Tao, nor is it a distinct “entity”, nor is the Tao an emanation or a direction of an identifiable transcendent entity. The Tao is not a god, by my understanding.

d.. Some people refer to a “soul of the universe” as “god”. If they mean that their own approach to the universe has a holistic character, they are not really talking about a “god” entity. If they believe that the universe really has god-like attributes of consciousness or intelligence, then I demur. I think the universe does not have such attributes in any objective sense.

e.. Animism, and maybe some folk versions of Hinduism, etc, may involve a whole pantheon of supernatural beings which influence the physical world. They may be subject to certain limitations; and perhaps can be controlled by magic; but their limitations are not our limitations, and they are gods by my definition. I think such entities are fictitious.

f.. The Jewish religion defined the concept of god with which I am most familiar. This god is great transcendent creator, far above and beyond the universe and yet intimately involved with it: one who creates, maintains, and judges the universe. Christianity and Islam and various other off shoots attempt to make this being more accessible. I was once a Christian, but now I think god does not exist. More… http://sky.fit.qut.edu.au/~hostuart/why.atheism2.html

Related Articles:

• Syria February 2012: Two Perspectives
• EGYPT: THE GROSS INSECURITY OF THE DHIMMI
• Female Circumcision in the Maldives, the Islamic Movement and Islamophobia
• Australia Day message
• Republicans/Democrats: Is there a Christian Alternative?

This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License.