This question is unfortunately very common, as in the case of Pascal's wager , most believers put this question with an attitude of defiance ("there responds to this! I bet you can not!"), being visible in the illusion that the original question is that the atheist never thought of it, and it will be unable to answer it.
Surprise: any atheist who is interested in discussing such issues ever thought in this matter, and immediately found several problems in it.
The first problem is this: it is an argument from ignorance, already mentioned here and here . This argument in this context boils down to this: "I do not know / not understand / I do not see how, once it was God." Since this is a bad argument when used in relation to something that is not yet understood or explained by science (eg the origin of the universe), since it makes sense that a supernatural explanation just win "by default", but shows more "silly" when used in relation to something that has already been explained and understood by many people, but the believer in question does not know or understand - or tried to know or understand - these explanations. It's like someone thinking these days (as happened in prehistory) that a storm is a discussion between "the gods".
In other words, is a tremendous ignorance - and intellectual laziness - to attribute emotions or one's capacity for good (or bad) to "God" when they can be explained by evolution, psychology, neurology and philosophy. But learning about all this is hard work, is not it?
A second problem is the dualistic mentality and anti-human , it says - and is thus guilty of so much suffering throughout history - all that is profound, significant, important or "good" must have a supernatural origin, outside we plan not achievable by the intelligence and the humanities. As the charge of Keats to Newton for having "unlocked the Rainbow" and thus destroyed the beauty and poetry of the same (as if there was only beauty and poetry in total ignorance ...), this is a mindset anti-human and anti life, we take the best of ourselves and say that this can only come from a supernatural plane and incomprehensible (whether "God" is anything "new age" undefined), because if it were understood and explained in purely human would lose all its value.
This, sorry to say, is absurd. The love of one person by another does not need an external source or justification or supernatural to have value, to make poetry and purity. Rather, the claim that these sources are needed, there is that you are taking value. What I feel for someone - a girlfriend, a relative, a friend - needs no external justification, need not come from a "spiritual plane", it loses value to come "only" me - quite the contrary, lose all and any value unless it come to me if it was not mine.
In fact, give all that is good in man to something "extra-human" only demonstrates one thing: a total hatred of humanity and himself. Something very common in many popular religions, "coincidentally".
(Note: please restrict any comment that you make to the previous question and answer, and not other issues such as the existence or nonexistence of God. Thank you.)
Possibly related posts:
- The problem of "God exists because the universe exists"
- FAQ: "How can you be an atheist? You can not prove that God does not exist! "
- FAQ: "Atheism has killed millions! Look at Soviet Russia! "
- FAQ: "Atheism is just another religion!"
- FAQ: "But if God does not exist, and do not persist after death, what is the meaning of all this?"
Labels: argument from ignorance , Atheism FAQ
atheism exhaust all the good that is in the human being, you can sample in the laboratory that love and kindness is an evolutionary process, prove.
[Not related to the post, and completely in upper case. * Sigh * - Dehumanizer]