*[I believe] Atheism is an absurd worldview

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

You cannot rationally justify a belief in a purposeful or meaningful world unless you invoke God. As such, your belief is irrational.

Actually, just because YOU can't justify a belief in purposeful or meaningful world unless you invoke God; that doesn't mean that others can't.

 

[Gambit]

How does a disbelief in the existence of a God preclude the possibility of finding meaning in life? Please support your claims with reasoned arguments.

The atheist has a teleonomic view of the world. This is in contradistinction to theist who has a teleological one. In the teleonomic worldview of the atheist, there is no purpose; there is just the appearance of purpose which can be explained away (at least, in theory) by blind mechanism. In the teleological worldview of the theist, there is a real (as opposed to an apparent) purpose. Everything is seeking the good where the ultimate good is God (a.k.a. the uncaused cause, the final cause).

"The good is what everything desires." - St. Thomas Aquinas

 

[Augustus]

You can believe whatever you want. But the question is whether or not you can rationally justify your belief. You cannot rationally justify a belief in an ultimate purpose (a.k.a. final cause or telos) without invoking God. Therefore, if you hold such a belief, then you are holding an irrational belief.

You can rationally justify many beliefs in terms of (subjective) logic and reasoning, not in terms of an objective purpose though.

Ultimately we are all 'irrational' in that we hold beliefs that cannot be objectively justified. Secular ideologies like humanism are basically Christianity-lite with God taken out of the equation but reliant on monotheistic concepts such as the concept of a singular humanity that does not exist in most traditional belief systems.

Doesn't bother me to admit that. I don't have a psychological need to justify my beliefs in terms of pure rationality.

 

[Sunstone]

The atheist has a teleonomic view of world. This is in contradistinction to theist who has a teleological one. In the teleonomic worldview of the atheist, there is no purpose; there is just the appearance of purpose which can be explained away (at least, in theory) by blind mechanism. In the teleological worldview of the theist, there is a real (as opposed to an apparent) purpose. Everything is seeking the good where the ultimate good is God (a.k.a. the uncaused cause, the final cause).

"The good is what everything desires." - St. Thomas Aquinas

You have still failed to explain why any purpose an atheist (or other) asserts for his or her life is illegitimate.

 

[leibowde84]

You can believe whatever you want. But the question is whether or not you can rationally justify your belief. You cannot rationally justify a belief in an ultimate purpose (a.k.a. final cause or telos) without invoking God. Therefore, if you hold such a belief, then you are holding an irrational belief.

You are moving the goal post. You said "meaning", not "ultimate purpose" or "final cause".

 

[leibowde84]

The atheist has a teleonomic view of the world. This is in contradistinction to theist who has a teleological one. In the teleonomic worldview of the atheist, there is no purpose; there is just the appearance of purpose which can be explained away (at least, in theory) by blind mechanism. In the teleological worldview of the theist, there is a real (as opposed to an apparent) purpose. Everything is seeking the good where the ultimate good is God (a.k.a. the uncaused cause, the final cause).

"The good is what everything desires." - St. Thomas Aquinas

You are confusing atheism with materialism.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You cannot rationally justify a belief in an ultimate purpose (a.k.a. final cause or telos) without invoking God.

My views, including my purpose in life, I have to think about. I have to weigh evidence, consider outcomes, and to a degree also consider how my actions effect others. I do not get the luxury of the simplicity of turning to an ancient book to tell me how things should be and accepting that book at face value. I don't need god to tell me how to get through life, and if there is a god I'm sure this entity would like to see us doing more on our own without turning to this entity like a spoiled child who turns to their parents for everything.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Everything is seeking the good where the ultimate good is God (a.k.a. the uncaused cause, the final cause).

If everything must have a cause, then it only logically follows that god too must have a cause. To say everything has a cause, leading to an ultimate cause, it is to arbitrarily stop short to drop the goal-post off at "god." For all we know, if there is a god, there may be something above god.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

The atheist denies that world has any ultimate telos or purpose.

Does a wild animal do the same? No, they do not. Why would you assume that a human being of any form/caliber actively denies that the world has purpose unless they specifically told you this?

What you're really saying is that you can't formulate a purpose for yourself without pretending you are buddies with a mystical/magical being of some form. You're saying that, outside the context of your beliefs, you, personally, have no meaning. Honestly - I find that even more sad than someone actively denying that the world has purpose.

 

[viole]

The atheist has a teleonomic view of the world. This is in contradistinction to theist who has a teleological one. In the teleonomic worldview of the atheist, there is no purpose; there is just the appearance of purpose which can be explained away (at least, in theory) by blind mechanism. In the teleological worldview of the theist, there is a real (as opposed to an apparent) purpose. Everything is seeking the good where the ultimate good is God (a.k.a. the uncaused cause, the final cause).

"The good is what everything desires." - St. Thomas Aquinas

If you believe that agents can only have purpose if they believe in something greater than themselves, then God has no purpose, by definition.

Ergo, if God is not miserable by knowing that it cannot rely on external purposes which are not set arbitrarily by Himself, why should we be? You know. Being in His image and all.

Ciao

- viole

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

Philosophical absurdism is not the same thing as something being "absurd" in the colloquial sense. Believing the world to be absurd (i.e. random, without inherent meaning) is not the same thing as supporting an absurd (i.e. silly, irrational) worldview. You're playing word games here.

 

[Willamena]

The atheist has a teleonomic view of the world. This is in contradistinction to theist who has a teleological one. In the teleonomic worldview of the atheist, there is no purpose; there is just the appearance of purpose which can be explained away (at least, in theory) by blind mechanism. In the teleological worldview of the theist, there is a real (as opposed to an apparent) purpose. Everything is seeking the good where the ultimate good is God (a.k.a. the uncaused cause, the final cause).

"The good is what everything desires." - St. Thomas Aquinas

Some atheists have a teleological view. They believe in human agency.

 

[outhouse]

The atheistic worldview is an absurd one. Why? Because the atheist views the world as ultimately meaningless and therefore as absurd.

Yet you cannot provide a single example to substantiate a single claim.

 

[outhouse]

They are no more objectively true than the theistic ideologies

Nothing you can substantiate

 

[outhouse]

In the teleonomic worldview of the atheist, there is no purpose;

Factual rhetoric.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

@Gambit - out of curiosity, why all the hate for atheism? It's hard to tell for sure online, but you seem to be a lot more ragey and spend more energy on atheism than can be explained by just a philosophical difference of opinion.

Did an atheist steal your girlfriend or something? Kick your dog? Not pay you back a loan?

 

[Gambit]

This statement must be held as meaningless and absurd as it started on the false pretenses that atheists do not believe in free will, meaning or purpose. It must also be held as meaningless and absurd because you fail to show how or why "free will" is necessary in the creative process.

No free will, no creative agent. It's that simple. (Atheists may believe in free will, but they cannot rationally justify that belief based on their Godless worldview.)

We once thought that biological design needed a creator, but we now know that natural selection can do all the designing on its own. Similarly, we once thought that human design required a conscious designer inside us, but we now know that memetic selection can do it on its own. (source: pg. 242, "The Meme Machine" by Susan Blackmore)

What does this implies? It implies that human artifacts (e.g. pocket watches) are as much the result of blind mechanisms at play as are natural artifacts (e.g. eyeballs). On the atheistic worldview, there is no intelligent activity in the world whatsoever (human, divine, or otherwise). All appearances of intelligent activity in the world must be attributed to blind mechanisms at play and therefore deemed as purely illusory.

 

[Gambit]

Completely wrong. Atheism does not view the world as ultimately meaningless it just views the world as without having a special meaining externally imposed by deities.

I'm spot on. Atheism views the world as ultimately purposeless and therefore meaningless.

 

[Gambit]

So you need to believe in God to make your life meaningful? That sounds rather sad.

We need to invoke God to rationally justify a belief in a teleological world.

 

[leibowde84]

Because the atheist views the world as ultimately meaningless

This isn't even true for materialists, as an after-life is in no way necessary for life to have meaning.

No free will, no creative agent. It's that simple. (Atheists may believe in free will, but they cannot rationally justify that belief based on their Godless worldview.)

Sure they can. Why would a belief in the existence of God be necessary for us to have free-will. Materialists might have an issue, but there is nothing about atheism that denies the possibility of belief in our ability to make our own choices.

Free-will is defined as the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion. So, in actuality, if God is all-knowing/omniscient, God knows our fate and future. This seems to contradict the existence of free-will if our fate is already known by God. Without the existence of an omniscient God, we are actually free to determine our own future.