Common objections to atheism and counter-apologetics

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Straw men)
(Appeals to solipsism)
Line 38: Line 38:
* [[That might be true for you, but its not true for me]]
* [[That might be true for you, but its not true for me]]
* [[Religion is another way of knowing]]
* [[Religion is another way of knowing]]
* [[Faith is a virtue]]
{{Common objections}}
{{Common objections}}

Revision as of 05:51, 13 March 2010

Common objections to atheism and counter-apologetics




With the growing rise of "new atheism", non-believers have seen an increasing hostility from theists. Common criticisms of atheism and counter-apologetic arguments are made to support the theist's position. These usually fall into one of three categories.

Appeals to emotion

Since the removal of mandatory prayer in American schools, atheism has been the focus of an increased political and media reaction in the form of fear and smear campaigns. These appeals to emotion have been coming increasing from politicians such as Monique Davis, who stated that, "It is dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists."

Straw men

Probably the most common argument against atheism and counter-apologetics from the theistic ranks, is straw man depictions of the atheist position. These can range from misrepresentations of evolutions such as leading questions like "if we came from monkeys, how come monkeys are still around today" or assertions that science is as much of a religious faith as Christianity, or misrepresentations about atheism and secular humanism being synonymous with immorality, communism or mass murder.

Appeals to solipsism

Perhaps the most interesting of the three categories is the increasing problem of appeals to solipsism. The idea that we can't know everything (or anything, depending on how far the theist wishes to take it), and thus we can never completely rule god out. Perhaps he's hiding on the other side of Pluto where we just can't see him. This is a classic 'god of the gaps' argument. However, this line of argument would seem to create more questions that it solves. If we take the theists' assertions to their ultimate conclusions, i.e. that "we can't know everything," or that, "we can't know anything for certain," then how can they claim to know anything about their god? How do they know he exists at all?

v · d Common objections to atheism and counter-apologetics
Personal   Why are you trying to tear down other people's faith? · Why can't everyone just have their own beliefs? · What are your qualifications? · Atheists believe in nothing · You are a communist · Why do atheists inspire such hatred? · That's not my God
Religious   That's not in my Bible · They're not true Christians · You just want to sin · Atheists know there is a God · It takes more faith to disbelieve than it does to believe · God doesn't believe in atheists · Science is a faith · Atheism is a religion · Atheists worship materialism · Hypocrisy of celebrating religious holidays · Atheism is based on faith · Religious belief is beneficial
Science and logic   You can't prove God doesn't exist · Science can't touch god · God can't be defined · So you think we came from nothing / pondsoup / monkeys? · If God didn't create everything, who did? · That might be true for you, but its not true for me · Religion is another way of knowing · Apologetics and dinosaurs
Personal tools
wiki navigation