Why Are There So Many Atheist Blogs?

Does that mean all the religious blogs are protesting too much?

Does this perhaps call for a round of Name That Logical Fallacy? Take a shot of whiskey for each one you find!

“…a round of Name That Logical Fallacy? Take a shot of whiskey for each one you find!”

That sounds like a dangerous game. I’d like to still have a liver when I’m 30.

Can we use the number of churches to prove god does not exist?
You see, something inside is telling Christians – god doesn’t exist. Rather than think about what that might mean to them, the Christian will gather each week with the rest of the doubters in their community to reassure each other that there really is a god. The sheer volume of churches needed to hold the number of people in doubt demonstrates the non-existence of that which they are too afraid to allow themselves to stop believing.
Or, maybe it is just a bad argument all around.

Here is what I commented over on Joey’s blog:

Joey,
The gist of your argument seems to be that my lack of belief in your god is proof that your god exists.
If that is so, then your lack of belief in thousands of gods other than your favorite is proof that they all exist too.

As others here have tried to explain, atheist blogs and atheist activists spend most of their time trying to resist the things that actual, living believers try to impose upon us. The conflicts are more often about civil rights and public policy than about theology. Most of us know that arguments about the existence of gods are futile because the definitions that most modern theists offer include that their gods can only be perceived if they want to be perceived, and for less than clear reasons, they seldom want to be.

Joey, let me echo the sentiments of some others here and suggest that if you want to understand someone who is different from you, ASK them about their thoughts, feelings and actions, rather than TELL them. Do your own research, and leave the amateur psychoanalysis out of it. Get to know several atheists on an on-going, intimate level. If you do this you will have to be willing to see that you have been wrong about them. That requires humility and courage. Don’t worry, you’ll not have to decide that you’ve been wrong about your god, but you will have to admit that when it comes to actual, living, individuals who don’t share your beliefs, you have been operating with stereotypes and you don’t really know what you are talking about.

So, does this mean that because I don’t talk about atheism in my blog that I’m a true non-believer? 😉

From Joey:

refuse to acknowledge due to mulish pride.

I try not to be arrogant (elitist?) and I do not believe I have excessive pride. Maybe I’m even down on myself too much.

The reason I oppose belief is because I find it inaccurate and often harmful to others.

If you want us to take you seriously, Joey, then quit the stereotypes.

Try this one on for size, Joey:

Why are there so many atheism religious blogs? I saw recently how one guy collects them all in one place so you can “feed” on a life without God, literally hundreds of blog links, enough reading for several years.

…

You see, something inside is telling the atheistic religious bloggers – God really does not exist. Rather than yield to his love this obvious reality, the atheist theist will convince himself/herself that God doesn’t exist actually exists and in so doing, proves that he in fact does not exist, but that they are unwilling to acknowledge it. The sheer volume of atheistic religious blogs testify to the non-existence of one they refuse to acknowledge insist on acknowledging due to mulish pride.

Then tell me why the shoe doesn’t fit equally badly on the other foot.

J Myers said:

arrogant (elitist?)

No, not even close; two very different things.

Point taken. That was not my best attempt at humor.

Hey Joey, projekshun, ur doin it rite.

Why can’t we ever be secretly denying the existence of Vishnu? Come on! Have some originally with your completely inane attempts at suggesting that we “doth protest too much”.

I guess we can all stop hiding behind Mojoey’s blogroll-of-denial now.

I protest. There’s also an evil planet-of-denial, which deserves at least a mention. 🙂

The real reason so many atheists have blogs is because atheists are often more literate and better read.

http://hotchurchaddiction.blogspot.com/

And bloggers write about Santa Clause because – Santa exists!

On October 31st, 2008 at 9:54 pm, muffin Says:

Gotta love the whole “atheists are proof of god!” type argument. It never gets old.

Sometimes I think there is no point in trying to engage Xians logically. To them, EVERYTHING is proof of god. A lot of them cannot grasp the concept that someone might not believe what they do.

I am sure many of us have gotten the “Have you been to church/read the Bible?” response, usually followed by some form of “Well, you just did it wrong” and/or “You should come to MY church, it’s different!”

Also I think there is no point trying to disprove religion to a lot of them because they have never really proved it to themselves. They just believe what they were given.

I think a lot of them really do live in a bubble. (And if they can make broad statements about us, I have no qualms making broad statements about them.)

As a Christian, I must say that I appreciate the title and theme of this blog. I, for one, would like to know more about the foundations of a belief system that are foreign to me. To learn and share, not to convert or be converted. Many forget that the only group of people Jesus disdained, were religious legalists.
An example of a question that I have about atheism is:
Is it more common to espouse this perspective due to one’s own observations, denial of the god that other’s claim to see, both, or neither? thanks.

bud, you asked,

Is it more common to espouse this perspective due to one’s own observations, denial of the god that other’s claim to see, both, or neither? thanks.

Your gracious attitude deserves a thoughtful answer, but I am not sure of the meaning of your question. Could you please clarify it for me?

bud,
Thank you for the clarification. I’m working on a comprehensive answer with some useful references that are eluding me right now, so I apologize for the delay, and please stay tuned.

Bud,
I studied religion, philosophy and history in college. Through these studies I learned how religion evolved, and has been used throughout the ages as a tool by those who would seek to control people. When you see exactly how and why a religion was founded, you tend to be able to see through the smoke and mirrors, as it were. But on a personal level, like Jack, I examined my own beliefs, at the time, being on the fence as a christian, why I wouldn’t come out and say I am not a christian any longer, it was fear. Fear of being sent to hell, pure and simple. It took a while to pass that fear. Even with the education, the knowledge, the history of how religion was constructed, it still took me many years to finally say, unashamedly, I am an atheist.

aaron,
starting with your statement “on a personal level, like jack…” i would have the same response and question for you as jack, due to the similarities ( at the fear of sounding like i am stereotyping, which is not my intent)

i do differentiate between christian faith and christian religion. religion is a man made set of rules designed to guide their followers to the christian faith, by adding man made guidelines and doctrines, even unto becoming apostate. i had to leave the roman catholic church (similar to luther) to become a christian. i believe it is important to analyze the christian faith, not any particular christian religion, to the other components of your observations, to get a true reading of one of the factors involved in your decision. this is not a judgement of your decisions in any way, just a personal recommendation from someone who gets angry when the truth of my faith gets distorted by a man made religions.

richard,
btw. i am still “staying tuned.”

Hi bud,
Sorry for the delay. The three-dimensional world often imposes less important distractions like working, eating and voting.
For context, here is your question:

do you think more people become atheists because of what they learn through science and nature, or because of bad experiences with theists, both, or neither? i am not including those who grew up with these beliefs, just those who made their decision on their own, at a later time in life.

Before I answer, here’s my disclaimer: It’s always risky to generalize about atheists.

I have heard and read hundreds of personal accounts of how people became atheists. They are sometimes called “deconversion stories.” There is a large collection of them at a site called Positive Atheism. For those who changed as adults, the process described is often appallingly painful.

I have found no source or study where people’s reasons have been categorized and counted, so we have no statistical information about what are the more common causes of turning away from the religion of one’s upbringing. I can only offer my overall non-scientific impression that there is no particular cause or reason that is definitely more predominant than any other. The bottom line is no single cause is usually enough.

You asked if “people become atheists because of what they learn through science and nature,” and I would say certainly there are many for whom that was a major, though probably not the only influence. Many religious parents hold their breath when their children go off to college because they have seen that exposure to methods of critical thinking, logic, the scientific method, other religious systems, philosophy, and simply meeting people who are different often results in young people losing interest in their family’s religion.

About having bad experiences with theists, there are some horrific tales, but I think that cause is less common and usually not sufficient to be the only one that turns people away from their faith. Experiences of abuse or hypocrisy might be more likely to cause a religious person to switch from one sub-group to another, rather than become an apostate.

What I pick up from all these stories is there usually is a combination of factors, but one ingredient seems to often be in the mix: They often seem to have been born more skeptical than their peers or their siblings. Very often people describe having always been the more questioning, more circumspect one in the family. They often were fully involved in their family’s religious activities, but something never quite soaked in, something always was nagging them deep in their minds. For many though not all, they seem to have a trait built into their personalities that needs more persuasion than simply the preferences of their parents, the assertions of scripture or the reassurances of their pastors.

There are a few other posts here on Friendly Atheist that have gathered comments about how and why people have turned away from the religion of their childhood. Here are one by Hemant and one by Mike Clawson.

Joey Nelson:

Have any of you ever heard of a “straw man”? It’s something very easy to do in the realm of debate (quite honestly, atheists are great at it).

Yup, plenty of atheists, including the prominent ones, are good at straw men. However, when you get past the straw men, the solid problems with religion still remain.

Furthermore, if you are going to accuse someone of creating a straw man, you should at least explain why you think a straw man is being made. Now you wrote this:

Irina began to question: “Can’t they tell they are giving themselves away? Adults tell you there are no gremlins or ghosts. They tell you once or twice, and that’s it. But with God, they tell you over and over again.

To be fair to you, Richard Wade’s response did not explicitly note that it is the repetition of the claim that there is no God that strikes you as a red flag. To be fair to Wade, he is absolutely right to reply,

your lack of belief in thousands of gods other than your favorite is proof that they all exist too.

You keep repeating your claim that Christianity is true at least as often as the adults around Irina repeated that there is no God. If one were to follow your reasoning, one could claim that your repetition is a sign that you are trying to reassure yourself in the face of your nagging doubts. Wade is absolutely right: your line of thinking cuts both ways, and invalidates itself accordingly.