1,000 hits!

Sometime last Thursday morning, The Midwestern Gentleman passed 1,000 hits since moving to WordPress.  The pace has quickened in the meantime, with another 130 hits in the intervening days.  I know that’s nothing by Net standards, but it means a lot to me.  Thanks to everyone who is reading and discussing these days.  I’ll try to keep the content interesting and semi-regular to make it worth your while to stop!

Why not agnosticism?

A reader writes:

I still have some investigating to do, but I am nearly ready to give up on organized religion for good. With that almost out of the way, there are two possibilities left: some other god(s) such as a deist god or no god at all. I agree with the notion that our ignorance of the origin of the universe does not necessitate god’s existence, but I don’t understand how it (or any other evidence we have at the present) could necessitate god’s absence either. Therefore, I am having trouble finding a single reason to think god does not exist. Unless I am missing something, rationality can only take someone as far as rejecting organized religion and its general anti-rationality attitude and becoming an agnostic. Actual denial of god seems to always involve a gut feeling, AKA a belief.

Since you made a point to clarify that you have “concluded” god does not exist rather than just “believing” he does not exist, I thought maybe you could shed some light on the issue. You imply that you have found some rational reason to take the extra step past doubting the Christian God to doubting any god at all, which makes me very curious. Could you please elaborate on what evidence led you to rationally deduce that there is no god, dismissing even a deist god? I would love to hear what you have to say.

Thanks,
Mike

First, thanks for the great question, Mike. It’s one that comes up pretty often, and one I had to wrestle with myself. I can only answer as to what convinces me, so for what it’s worth, here we go.

You reasonably ask, “what evidence led you to rationally deduce that there is no god”? My simple answer is, the best evidence against the existence of a god is the lack of evidence for that existence. This question, and how it is framed, plays a large role in debates between atheists and religious people (and sometimes agnostics). Religious people are often forced to admit, “OK, fine, I can’t prove that god exists. But you can’t prove that there is no god.” Atheists sometimes reflexively respond, “No, the burden is on you to prove that god does exist, and you can’t, so QED, there is no god.” I agree with the latter position, but my reasons need a little explanation.