Are atheists taking atheism by faith?


The problem with Atheism, is the fact that they can't prove their claims for which god doesn't exist, but where is the evidence for that? In which they shift the burden of proof, to theists that are taking theism by faith. The problem that i see, is that atheists taking Atheism by faith in which they can't proved their claim that there is no god. Are atheism a faith?


Posted 2020-04-07T19:07:26.090

Reputation: 1

Question was closed 2020-04-08T10:06:11.243

3This question needs to be stated more clearly. Also, how do you justify your initial assertion that atheists 'can't prove their claims'. A vast body of atheist argument can't be just dismissed in this way. Is your basic point that since atheists cannot prove their claims, they are epistemologically in no position to criticise theists for not being able to prove theistic claims? – Geoffrey Thomas – 2020-04-07T19:24:21.610


In a generic sense, everything is a "faith" because nobody can "prove" anything about the world, it isn't mathematics. And even in mathematics one needs to have faith in their axioms and rules of inference. We all need "faith" to believe that the sun will rise tomorrow or that invisible unicorns are not floating in the sky. But you have a wrong idea of what "faith" means in the context of religion, and atheism isn't that, see Scientific Faith Is Different From Religious Faith.

– Conifold – 2020-04-07T19:25:17.507

2Yes atheism is a belief; we cannot prove the existence of God and we cannot prove its non-existence. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA – 2020-04-07T19:44:18.900

Welcome to SE Philosophy! Thanks for your contribution. Please take a quick moment to take the tour or find help. You can perform searches here or seek additional clarification at the meta site. Don't forget, when someone has answered your question, you can click on the checkmark to reward the contributor.

– J D – 2020-04-08T00:55:53.647

As an empiricist and athiest, one of my basic precepts is that anything that can be claimed can be doubted, and thus the burden of proof is on the claimaint. It's a common sense principle since anyone can claim anything anytime. It's not faith when experience has shown that thousands of gods have been claimed to exist, and none have been proven in a scientific sense.

– J D – 2020-04-08T00:59:18.990

1@JD That's a great argument for agnosticism. Not so much for atheism. – curiousdannii – 2020-04-08T02:34:24.620

@curiousdannii You seem confused. I'm not arguing for athiesm. I'm arguing against the claim that an athiest has faith in his belief. The argument against faith is skepticism, and agnosticism is the first principle. I don't know. The remedy for ignorance then is to demonstrate the non-existent God with rationalism tilted in favor of empiricism. Now I do know. QED. – J D – 2020-04-08T04:37:34.510

Im not a religious person, I just want to understand the philosophy of religion and Atheism beliefs more clearly, its very confusing the doubt of faith of those believers and non-believers. Am very glad you all answer this question, im enlightened. – J'stinz – 2020-04-08T10:06:00.367



Firstly, there is no problem with atheism. As an atheist, it's a completely logical point of view that unless something is proven, there is no basis to believe it. Obviously this proof can range from mathematical proof to physical proof, the underlying requirement is that any proof is objectively verifiable by anyone or any group that would challenge the proposition.

The proposed existence of supernatural beings has been tested ad infinitum and has failed every time in any sort of repeatable, verifiable instance.

There is a huge test underway at the moment that is including the entire population of the world. If an interventionist god existed there would be clearly quantifiable evidence available that would indicate that segments of society that engage in prayer will be numerically less affected than societies whom do not pray.

Or even that any particular religion is what you like to call "blessed" and had the favor of the true god or gods.

Let's call this the Supreme test to prove that god exists or doesn't exist and once it's over, let's collate the results accept them and never speak of it again.


Posted 2020-04-07T19:07:26.090

Reputation: 9

Alas, since the praying populations tend to insist in gathering to pray, it is to fear that they die more than unbelievers. – armand – 2020-04-08T06:48:48.680

Couple of issues with the answer: A) You misplace God for religion. B) Religious people could easily refute the "experiment" by saying that God doesn't have to answer their prayers. Which is why the concept of God cannot be "proven" by experiments. See this answer in a different question.

– Yechiam Weiss – 2020-04-21T08:29:26.783

A) The premise of the question was about the existence of god, That I mentioned religion in my response is because the underlying reason for any religion is a belief in a god or gods. B) If there is any interventionist spirit in the world, you seriously think that’s he’s taken a break for this one? “Sorry guys, didn’t see this one coming, I’m on my lunch break, you’ll be fine” - God. I have no doubt that this will do nothing to kill irrational belief in fairy tales. When people are completely deluded, the truth will not help. – Noshy – 2020-04-22T23:28:57.383