Question for Atheists: What, in your opinion is the strongest argument for Theism?

Kaizen

Student
K
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
37
With all due respect to those who don't think there are any "strong" arguments for theism, I would prefer that you don't fill up this thread just to say that you don't think there are any. We can just assume that if you don't post here, you probably don't think that there are any. Feel free to post if you want to make any other pertinent points.

For those that think there's some validity (doesn't have to be a lot), which arguments seem to hold at least a little weight in your minds? This would be for any form of theism, deism, etc.

Ready, set, discuss.
 
I would have to go with the existence of consciousness.

But it's not so much an argument for theism as an argument against materialism.
 
I think probably the biggest argument in favor of theism or belief in an afterlife of any kind is that such belief is supposed to give a sense of purpose to the believer.

I've heard many believers say that if they didn't think there were any purpose to the universe or their own lives then they'd just lose it completely. Personally, I find this to be a lousy argument because as an atheist I like to create my own meaning in my life, no supernatural entities required. I also find it to be a basically selfish & egocentric argument, which isn't that bad I suppose since we're mostly selfish & egocentric creatures. The thing I don't like about the argument is the hint of hypocrisy whereby it is selfish but some try to make it out that it isn't selfish or about them.

As I said, I personally think it's a lousy argument, and I think it's the best one believers have available to them.
 
Alkatran said:
I would have to go with the existence of consciousness.

But it's not so much an argument for theism as an argument against materialism.
Click to expand...


Why couldn't consciousness have a materialistic basis? You seem to be rejecting this possibility a priori.

ETA: There doesn't necessarily have to be a "ghost in the machine" for consciousness to arise.
 
Last edited:
Theism gives one a carrot of hope to pursue in a world of sorrow before tumbling off of the cliff of existence.
 
Björn Toulouse said:
Theism gives one a carrot of hope to pursue in a world of sorrow before tumbling off of the cliff of existence.
Click to expand...


Exactly! I don't subscribe to this, but I understand it. If theism works as a coping skill (which is the case with many of those with whom I've had discussions on the subject), seems valuable to me.
 
ParanoidAndroid said:
Exactly! I don't subscribe to this, but I understand it. If theism works as a coping skill (which is the case with many of those with whom I've had discussions on the subject), seems valuable to me.
Click to expand...


I think George Carlin put it well...

"Religion - religion, at best - at BEST - is like a lift in your shoe. If you need it for a while, and it makes you walk straight and feel better - fine. But you don't need it forever, or you can become permanently disabled. Religion is like a lift in the shoe, and I say just don't ask me to wear your shoes. And let's not go down and nail lifts onto the natives' feet."
 
No validity for me, but some variants of the Kalam cosmological argument might be the hardest to argue against in a debate. (again, not really any validity in it, but as you asked for the "strongest" I am grading on a curve...)
 
ParanoidAndroid said:
Exactly! I don't subscribe to this, but I understand it. If theism works as a coping skill (which is the case with many of those with whom I've had discussions on the subject), seems valuable to me.
Click to expand...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3602181#post3602181
We discussed this a little here. I am having a hard time letting go of some theist ideas for this exact reason. And it is not for myself. Since the age of 19 or 20 I have been comfortable the thought of no god and no afterlife. I don't know how to explain it all to my daughter and I don't know how to react/what to say when dealing with others sense of pain or loss. Things like "well they are in a better place now" just seem to come out of my mouth when I don't know what else to say. As I am typing this, a new employee just walked back here to the office to thank me for hiring him and to tell me that he has been praying for this job for last 3 weeks and I just smiled and said "that's nice". Over the course of the evening this guy has shared with me that he has recently been "saved", that he has 2 kids, the oldest is 16, was born 7 months premature, can't speak and still wears a diaper. Am I wrong for not challenging this guys faith or at least for not mentioning I am an agnostic/atheist? I just can't do it. It would be like telling some 6 year old that there is no Santa.
 
godofpie said:
Am I wrong for not challenging this guys faith or at least for not mentioning I am an agnostic/atheist? I just can't do it. It would be like telling some 6 year old that there is no Santa.
Click to expand...


I think you handled it well. I wouldn't say that you have to challenge the guy's faith, but I don't think you should make any secret of the fact that you're a non-theist either. If it comes up in conversation, declare yourself proudly and matter-of-factly without reservation, but don't be a jerk about it.

Then, if he wants to get into a discussion about atheism, go there. I think if you don't really know the person well, it's usually best to let the subject bring itself up.

I've had similar experiences with some of my colleagues, and I have generally found that so long as they don't feel that I'm "pushing" atheism on them, it's cool. In fact, by my behavior I've convinced a good number of people in my family and with whom I work that atheists are actually pretty good people :)
 
In my opinion, hands down, it has to be the "anthropic coincidences" that seem to be sewn into the laws of physics. You might summarize the argument like this:

If the universe was a cold, mathematical, uncaring thing, then it shouldn't care whether or not life (and consciousness) exist at all. When considering the infinitely many variations on what the "laws of physics" might look like, you can't help but to conclude that the vast majority of possible physical laws would yield a sterile universe. But ours is not sterile, so therefore it's more sensible to conclude it was a Creation rather than a fantastic coincidence.

It's reminiscent of the Intelligent Design argument, but much different because it allows the theist to acknowledge the soundness of evolution theory.

There are, of course, counter arguments.
 
Kaizen said:
With all due respect to those who don't think there are any "strong" arguments for theism, I would prefer that you don't fill up this thread just to say that you don't think there are any. We can just assume that if you don't post here, you probably don't think that there are any. Feel free to post if you want to make any other pertinent points.
Click to expand...

Okay, fair enough.

However, I do think that the strongest reason for theism is the fear of not existing after death. The concept of struggling through this life and to never ever exist again afterword is just too incomprehensible for the majority of folks.

This being the case, there is no requirement for any strong arguments for theism. Most people want to believe so badly that there is some form of existence after death that they are willing to accept the slightest suggestion, devoid of any reasonable evidence, that there is an afterlife...
 
Last edited:
godofpie said:
"well they are in a better place now" just seem to come out of my mouth when I don't know what else to say.
Click to expand...

At a funeral for a person who had been very sick, someone once said to me, "He's in a better place now. Even if there isn't... he's in a better place now."

I was floored. The speaker was Catholic. I agree, in some cases with the sentiment, especially after a traumatic battle: (even if there isn't) he's in a better place now.
 
Autolite said:
However, I do think that the strongest reason for theism is the fear of not existing after death. The concept of struggling through this life and to never ever exist again afterword is just too incomprehensible for the majority of folks.
Click to expand...


Good point. It should also be noted that the desire to believe in an afterlife is what makes people susceptible to sociopathic predators like John Edward and Sylvia Browne :mad:
 
Personal revelation. If god appears to you and convinces you of his existence, that doesn't mean you can use your personal revelation to convince me. It's not admissible evidence as far as I am concerned. But, I suppose it might be possible for me to have a similar experience within my own head that could utterly change my views - as long as that god didn't have a mission or purpose for me because that would completely kill the illusion for me. I can't fathom why an omnipotent god would need me for anything.
 
Kaizen said:
With all due respect to those who don't think there are any "strong" arguments for theism, I would prefer that you don't fill up this thread just to say that you don't think there are any. We can just assume that if you don't post here, you probably don't think that there are any. Feel free to post if you want to make any other pertinent points.

For those that think there's some validity (doesn't have to be a lot), which arguments seem to hold at least a little weight in your minds? This would be for any form of theism, deism, etc.

Ready, set, discuss.
Click to expand...

Sorry... there really aren't any valid arguments for theism. Burying your head in the sand doesn't change that fact. :cool:
 
JoeEllison said:
Sorry... there really aren't any valid arguments for theism. Burying your head in the sand doesn't change that fact. :cool:
Click to expand...

First off, if this post was meant to be ironic, please excuse me. Carry on.

Secondly, if this is truly what you believe, would you kindly go through the various responses above? I am sure that you will find many of them invalid, as do I, but there are some that do seem to have merit to me, and I would like to see more than a flip, two-sentence rebuttal.
 
Well, I have recently had to reject religion, very recently that is, and I am currently between deism and Athiesm. The only thing that is keeping me a possible deist is human consiousness. You can get me the smartest monkey in the world and he will never write a poem. No animal I know of has a level of consciousness or reason that even approaches humans. How do we expalin this? I know that it is a non sequiter to presume God gave this ability, so Athiesm will probally win out. Nevertheless, if your looking for "food for thought" human consciousness is pretty good.
 
Glen.Nogami said:
First off, if this post was meant to be ironic, please excuse me. Carry on.

Secondly, if this is truly what you believe, would you kindly go through the various responses above? I am sure that you will find many of them invalid, as do I, but there are some that do seem to have merit to me, and I would like to see more than a flip, two-sentence rebuttal.
Click to expand...
Since I don't know how to type, and I have a congenital lack of hand strength, "flip, two-sentence rebuttal" are sort of my specialty. :D

I wasn't trying to be ironic, though I WAS being more humorous than serious. On the other hand, none of the arguments for theism seem much more advanced than a child's insistence that Santa MUST exist.
 
If you want irony, the closest I can give is the fact that my complete rejection of all theistic arguments comes from the humble acceptance of the limits of my own perception. Try puzzling THAT one out!
 
JoeEllison said:
Since I don't know how to type, and I have a congenital lack of hand strength, "flip, two-sentence rebuttal" are sort of my specialty. :D

I wasn't trying to be ironic, though I WAS being more humorous than serious. On the other hand, none of the arguments for theism seem much more advanced than a child's insistence that Santa MUST exist.
Click to expand...


Ok, I think I see a bit of a disconnect. I'm not talking about arguments for theism being true. I haven't found any. I do, however, think that theism can be valuable for things like consolation in times of grief. Wouldn't you rather believe that dead, dear relatives were off in some glorious afterlife? Fits nicely with a sense of justice in the world. Is this the case? I doubt it, personally, but it can certainly be helpful for people who do believe it. I suspect it makes the grieving process easier and more pleasant. Is that not valid and desirable?
 
Glen.Nogami said:
Ok, I think I see a bit of a disconnect. I'm not talking about arguments for theism being true. I haven't found any.
Click to expand...
We agree so far.
I do, however, think that theism can be valuable for things like consolation in times of grief.
Click to expand...
Not me
Wouldn't you rather believe that dead, dear relatives were off in some glorious afterlife?
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I have little feeling that my preferences have much bearing on how reality actually works.
Fits nicely with a sense of justice in the world. Is this the case? I doubt it, personally, but it can certainly be helpful for people who do believe it. I suspect it makes the grieving process easier and more pleasant. Is that not valid and desirable?
Click to expand...
Personally, and in the long view of things, I don't believe that comfortable lies are better than inconvenient truths. Whatever possible, potential, and not guaranteed short-term benefits may come by pretending that dead people go to Disney World, I don't think they outweigh the negatives involved in living in a delusion.
 
Glen.Nogami said:
Ok, I think I see a bit of a disconnect. I'm not talking about arguments for theism being true. I haven't found any. I do, however, think that theism can be valuable for things like consolation in times of grief. Wouldn't you rather believe that dead, dear relatives were off in some glorious afterlife? Fits nicely with a sense of justice in the world. Is this the case? I doubt it, personally, but it can certainly be helpful for people who do believe it. I suspect it makes the grieving process easier and more pleasant. Is that not valid and desirable?
Click to expand...


But does theism really make the grieving process easier and more pleasant? I have seen those who believe in an afterlife have an incredibly hard a time accepting the reality of a loved one's death. In one case, I suspect the grieving process was harder, as the woman didn't believe her son went to heaven due to the fact that he had previously rejected the religion in which he had been raised.

I would think that deists or atheists would have statistically the same pain and length of mourning as theists. I wonder if any studies have been done on this.
 
Hokulele said:
But does theism really make the grieving process easier and more pleasant? I have seen those who believe in an afterlife have an incredibly hard a time accepting the reality of a loved one's death. In one case, I suspect the grieving process was harder, as the woman didn't believe her son went to heaven due to the fact that he had previously rejected the religion in which he had been raised.
Click to expand...

Weird... having never been any kind of theist, I sometimes miss these secondary negatives. I have a hard time imagining the concept of concerning myself with the disposition of the "eternal souls" of other people.
 
Without a doubt, the argument that holds up the best against human thought is the "shared personal experience" one.

It is far easier to convince people of the logical flaws in theism than it is to convince them that the entire history of religion represents a viral meme rather than something resembling actual truth. After all, if theism really is bogus, why do so many people believe?

Then, when one explains by suggesting just how easy it is for the uneducated and non-vigilant mind to succumb to prevarication (hence the masses that have gobbled up religion over the centuries), the counter-argument is something along the lines of "well if our minds are that feeble, then how can we trust the logical arguments you make against theism?" Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It is a very strong argument, mainly because to see why it is flawed one must first see why they are flawed -- something most humans aren't too great at, unfortunately.
 
rocketdodger said:
It is a very strong argument, mainly because to see why it is flawed one must first see why they are flawed -- something most humans aren't too great at, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

I agree. There needs to be a course, mandatory in all schools, about cognitive biases, paraeidolia, and all the other stupid things that our brains do. The professor needs to be a furious, curmudgeonly old man, railing about how "You're stupid, I'm stupid, and there's not a damn thing we can do about it! Pay attention to HOW you're stupid!"
 
2130389974_91baafa6b3.jpg
 
Seems like most of this "fear of death" stuff is an argument for souls rather than deities.

For me, the fact that so much of the universe can be modeled with such simple mathematics is a pillar in the case for something akin to deism.
 
I don't think that there is any argument for theism that rises above nonsense.

It would be dishonest of me to pretend to prefer, even if only for the sake of argument, one worthless notion to another.
 
MattusMaximus said:
Why couldn't consciousness have a materialistic basis? You seem to be rejecting this possibility a priori.

ETA: There doesn't necessarily have to be a "ghost in the machine" for consciousness to arise.
Click to expand...

The thread isn't about bullet proof arguments, it's about the 'best' argument for theism.

I happen to believe consciousness is a material phenomenon, but that's by no means a sturdy belief. It's a bit hard to test. [I define 'material' as obeying physical laws and interacting with normal matter, all we really need are the laws]
 
I'm interested by the number of atheists who are so willing to graciously answer this question as truthfully as possible. That is an extremely impressive and admirable behavior. I can't help but think that such capacity to give an honest analysis of the "other side's" best argument is the mark of great skepticism and rational thought.

I can't help wonder what reception the corollary quetion would receive on any number of the thiest forums. Would they be as gracious? Please note, that my prejudice leads me to believe they wouldn't, but that's an untested hypothesis.


ETA: I realize now that that challenge wouldn't be extremely fair. Afterall, this is a skeptics forum and not an athiest forum. It would be a better comparison to compare the responses from a Dawkinsnet and from beliefnet.
 
Last edited:
Alkatran said:
I would have to go with the existence of consciousness.

But it's not so much an argument for theism as an argument against materialism.
Click to expand...

This was my second choice, with the same qualifier as you listed above, and in subsequent responses.

My first choice was the Argument from First Cause. Science can never explain why there is something instead of nothing, nor even answer whether there is a "why" at all. Again, though, this isn't an argument for theism as such, just against pure materialism.

ETA: And it isn't even really a strong argument. It just points out that there are some questions science can't answer. It doesn't give any alternative answers or ways of answering.
 
Last edited:
MattusMaximus said:
I think George Carlin put it well...

"Religion - religion, at best - at BEST - is like a lift in your shoe. If you need it for a while, and it makes you walk straight and feel better - fine. But you don't need it forever, or you can become permanently disabled. Religion is like a lift in the shoe, and I say just don't ask me to wear your shoes. And let's not go down and nail lifts onto the natives' feet."
Click to expand...


That's definitely better than I put it. You gotta love Carlin.
 
It makes me feel warm and cuddly all over?

As it is supposed to be!

Or not?
 
The best argument for deism is the problem of the first cause, aka "What came before the big bang?". This isn't a great argument, because it has corollary in a theistic context - "Who made God?", which is why I'm an atheist, but it certainly useful for some people to engage in something that approaches willing suspension of disbelief.

I can see how positing a magical being unbounded by piddly little constraints like the laws of logic and physics comforts people, particularly people comforted by certainty.
 
Complexity said:
I don't think that there is any argument for theism that rises above nonsense.

It would be dishonest of me to pretend to prefer, even if only for the sake of argument, one worthless notion to another.
Click to expand...

I have to agree.

I don't see how one illogical or faulty argument can be "better" than another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom