Atheism - Obvious Default?

[ahhell]

I'm not sure what your problem is. I'm in agreement that atheism is the default position. The only issue is when non-atheists dispute this self-evident fact - as I've indicated.

I don't know about Thor, but my problem is I had no idea what you were getting at. It seems like you are saying, "I think this, therefore that is the default." Which doesn't make much sense so its probably not what you are saying.

Also, atheism being the default is clearly not self-evident. I suspect the reason you seem to have trouble communicating your thoughts* on this is because you think it is self-evident. I often have similar issues when trying to communicate things I thought were obvious.

*Given that both Thor and I don't seem to understand what you are trying to say. If it were just me, then I'd be pretty sure it was my problem rather than yours.

Edit, I think I see the issue.
Tassman seems to be using "Default" to mean what ought to be in terms of society and laws while I am using it to mean, what is in human psychology. I still disagree, agnosticism should be default in law and society, but that's not really much of a distinction. I could be wrong at the source of the misunderstanding.

 

[ynot]

What I mean by "atheism is the default position" (and what I believe Thor 2 means in the OP), is that atheism (no belief in a god or gods) is the original, starting, unchosen position of all people. Not a position that's a current, ongoing, chosen position of some people.

An atheist that chooses to become a theist (converts) then subsequently chooses not to be a theist (deconverts) becomes an atheist again by default (reverts).

 

[Thor 2]

What I mean by "atheism is the default position" (and what I believe Thor 2 means in the OP), is that atheism (no belief in a god or gods) is the original, starting, unchosen position of all people. Not a position that's a current, ongoing, chosen position of some people.

An atheist that chooses to become a theist (converts) then subsequently chooses not to be a theist (deconverts) becomes an atheist again by default (reverts).

Yes I go along with this.

Some here have suggested theism as a default because just about every society in the past has invented some kind of deities. I am talking about here and now however and that is the difference.

 

[ynot]

Yes I go along with this.

Some here have suggested theism as a default because just about every society in the past has invented some kind of deities. I am talking about here and now however and that is the difference.

Past societies also invented countless other imaginary creatures/beings that they (some at least) believed were actually real as well. Do they claim believing fairies, spirits, goblins, dragons and the like are actually real are "default positions" as well? That some have a predisposition to invent and hold such beliefs doesn't mean that all do, or that it's a "default position". Smoking was once a very "common position" but that didn't make it a "default position".

 

[Tassman]

What I mean by "atheism is the default position" (and what I believe Thor 2 means in the OP), is that atheism (no belief in a god or gods) is the original, starting, unchosen position of all people. Not a position that's a current, ongoing, chosen position of some people.

...and this also is what I mean but apparently, I did not express it clearly enough.

An atheist that chooses to become a theist (converts) then subsequently chooses not to be a theist (deconverts) becomes an atheist again by default (reverts).

Yes, supernatural entities of any sort have arisen in the minds of our species – they do not exist in and of themselves.

 

[Tassman]

Edit, I think I see the issue.
Tassman seems to be using "Default" to mean what ought to be in terms of society and laws while I am using it to mean, what is in human psychology. I still disagree, agnosticism should be default in law and society, but that's not really much of a distinction. I could be wrong at the source of the misunderstanding.

Oh dear. I seem to be the cause of endless confusion. Non-belief in gods is the default position because there are no gods, it’s as simple as that. Atheism becomes a problem in society ONLY when members of said society insist that there are gods, or spirits or similar and seek to impose the rules of their fictional entities on the rest of us.

 

[Guido Fawkes]

Thanks Thor, I do like a good rant and rave about many subjects, Think this will be the place for me, .

 

[Thor 2]

Thanks Thor, I do like a good rant and rave about many subjects, Think this will be the place for me, .

Welcome to the forum Guido!

 

[arthwollipot]

Thanks Thor, I do like a good rant and rave about many subjects, Think this will be the place for me, .

Oh boy, are you in for a treat.

 

[arthwollipot]

What I mean by "atheism is the default position" (and what I believe Thor 2 means in the OP), is that atheism (no belief in a god or gods) is the original, starting, unchosen position of all people. Not a position that's a current, ongoing, chosen position of some people.

An atheist that chooses to become a theist (converts) then subsequently chooses not to be a theist (deconverts) becomes an atheist again by default (reverts).

Babies have to learn to be theists because they have to learn everything including how not to **** themselves. Saying that babies are born atheist is trivially true and not a very interesting observation, in my opinion.

 

[ahhell]

Oh dear. I seem to be the cause of endless confusion. Non-belief in gods is the default position because there are no gods, it’s as simple as that. Atheism becomes a problem in society ONLY when members of said society insist that there are gods, or spirits or similar and seek to impose the rules of their fictional entities on the rest of us.

Ah, ok, then you are just misusing "default", I can't actually find a definition of default where this makes sense. There is not strong correlation between truth and the default position.

: failure to do something required by duty or law : neglect
2 archaic : fault
3 economics : a failure to pay financial debts was in default on her loan mortgage defaults
4a law : failure to appear at the required time in a legal proceeding The defendant is in default.
b : failure to compete in or to finish an appointed contest lost the game by default
5a : a selection made usually automatically or without active consideration due to lack of a viable alternative remained the club's president by default the default candidate
b computers : a selection automatically used by a program in the absence of a choice made by the user using the default settings

I would argue the only definition that really makes sense in this conversation is 5a. That being said, I think the balance of the evidences suggests the default is actually theism. Most adults are theists, the evidence strongly suggests that religion is one of first things societies invent for themselves. I think that strongly suggests the default for humans is theism.

Babies have to learn to be theists because they have to learn everything including how not to **** themselves. Saying that babies are born atheist is trivially true and not a very interesting observation, in my opinion.

I absolutely agree with this.

 

[LarryS]

Oh dear. I seem to be the cause of endless confusion. Non-belief in gods is the default position because there are no gods, it’s as simple as that. Atheism becomes a problem in society ONLY when members of said society insist that there are gods, or spirits or similar and seek to impose the rules of their fictional entities on the rest of us.

Maybe 'default' is the wrong word then, default does not mean correct choice, but preselected choice. IOW, given human neurophysiology, or given known evolutionary pressures - is atheism or theism the preselected choice?
As such, it's independent of whether there is a God or not, or whether it's rational to believe in a God or not.
For example, a belief in gravity is supported by evolutionary pressures . . . Is atheism or theism more supported by evolutionary pressures? If I am more likely to successfully procreate if I beleive in God, then theism is the default.

 

[ynot]

Babies have to learn to be theists because they have to learn everything including how not to **** themselves.

Yes, and that's why theism isn't a default (original) position (neither is not ******* yourself). Even when people learn they can decide to become theists, there is a decision period when they know they aren't theists (are atheists). Atheism is always the default (original) position that precedes theism.

Saying that babies are born atheist is trivially true and not a very interesting observation, in my opinion.

True is true. Better to have a true observation than an interesting observation, in my opinion.

 

[Thor 2]

Most adults are theists, the evidence strongly suggests that religion is one of first things societies invent for themselves. I think that strongly suggests the default for humans is theism.

Well I will say it again.

I am talking about today, not yesterday and back to the time when people were surrounded by phenomena, they had no explanation for.

Todays child in the more enlightened societies, is given explanations for earthquakes, thunderstorms, and so on. There is no need to conjure up ideas of gods being angry and so on.

My children, and the children of friends, have defaulted to atheism without exception, when not given religious indoctrination. I haven't heard of a child making up their own unique brand of woo when not fed a packaged brand. I am not saying it cannot happen, but I think it would be extremely rare. Not the default of many.

 

[LarryS]

Well I will say it again.

I am talking about today, not yesterday and back to the time when people were surrounded by phenomena, they had no explanation for.

Todays child in the more enlightened societies, is given explanations for earthquakes, thunderstorms, and so on. There is no need to conjure up ideas of gods being angry and so on.

My children, and the children of friends, have defaulted to atheism without exception, when not given religious indoctrination. I haven't heard of a child making up their own unique brand of woo when not fed a packaged brand. I am not saying it cannot happen, but I think it would be extremely rare. Not the default of many.

It is true that those who claim to be atheists and don't follow any religion is one a significan rise - but the percentage of folks who still believe in a higher power, or who believe in luck, is as high as ever.
Besides, believing in 'august dieties', ie gods of earthquakes and thunderstorms, etc.; such beliefs are super old fashioned and few have believed in such for a few hundred years or more.

 

[arthwollipot]

Yes, and that's why theism isn't a default (original) position (neither is not ******* yourself). Even when people learn they can decide to become theists, there is a decision period when they know they aren't theists (are atheists). Atheism is always the default (original) position that precedes theism.

Babies and infants don't have that kind of self-awareness. They don't know that they're atheists. They don't make the decision to become theists. They're brought up in that environment.

Analogy. Like all analogies this one has its limits. When I was a kid I joined the Scouts. I did this because my dad wanted me to and my brother was a scout. I didn't decide to join the scouts. I was never asked whether I wanted to or not. Similarly, I played soccer. I didn't decide to do that, I just went along with it because that was where my parents took me. It wasn't until after I had been doing these things for years that I realised that I could decide not to do them.

Kids are taken to church by their parents as infants and toddlers and children. They don't get a choice. They learn their religion as infants and it can sometimes be quite a few years before they realise that they can have a choice.

True is true. Better to have a true observation than an interesting observation, in my opinion.

True but trivial.

ETA: In fact, and this may be a better way of thinking about it, the default stance of an infant is whatever stance their parents have. Children of theist parents default to theism. Children of atheist parents default to atheism.

There you go, maybe this conversation was interesting after all.

 

[ynot]

Babies and infants don't have that kind of self-awareness. They don't know that they're atheists. They don't make the decision to become theists. They're brought up in that environment.

Did you even read my words you quoted? Hint - “Even when people [not babies] learn they can decide to become theists . . .“.

Analogy. Like all analogies this one has its limits. When I was a kid I joined the Scouts. I did this because my dad wanted me to and my brother was a scout. I didn't decide to join the scouts. I was never asked whether I wanted to or not. Similarly, I played soccer. I didn't decide to do that, I just went along with it because that was where my parents took me. It wasn't until after I had been doing these things for years that I realised that I could decide not to do them.

Kids are taken to church by their parents as infants and toddlers and children. They don't get a choice. They learn their religion as infants and it can sometimes be quite a few years before they realise that they can have a choice.

“Going along with” theism isn’t necessarily being a theist. I’ve never been a theist but I’ve heard from others that (from a very young age) they “Went along with, but never really believed”. Not all kids are as dumb as you seem to claim.

ETA: In fact, and this may be a better way of thinking about it, the default stance of an infant is whatever stance their parents have. Children of theist parents default to theism. Children of atheist parents default to atheism.

Without any inherited/indoctrinated influence (theistic or atheistic) children would be atheists be default, until they are old enough to decide to become theists and do.

People take-up smoking because other people smoke, that doesn’t mean smoking is the default position (as in “original, starting, unchosen position“).

 

[arthwollipot]

“Going along with” theism isn’t necessarily being a theist. I’ve never been a theist but I’ve heard from others that (from a very young age) they “Went along with, but never really believed”. Not all kids are as dumb as you seem to claim.

Different people are different.

Without any inherited/indoctrinated influence (theistic or atheistic) children would be atheists be default, until they are old enough to decide to become theists and do.

I don't think that's true. The invention of religion itself seems to be evidence against it. Voltaire said "If God didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him".

People take-up smoking because other people smoke, that doesn’t mean smoking is the default position (as in “original, starting, unchosen position“).

More true now than it used to be. And I don't think that's a great analogy because babies don't smoke.

 

[ynot]

Theism is the position of having belief in a god.

Atheism is the position of not having belief in a god.

All people begin with the position of not having belief in a god.

All people therefore begin as atheists.

Theists have an atheistic position regarding all the gods they don't have belief in.

 

[arthwollipot]

All people begin with the position of not having belief in a god.

This is the part I disagree with. While it is, as I have said, trivially true that babies are born without belief systems, there is a very good argument to be made that religion is a by-product of agency detection and therefore innate to human psychology.

I should add that not everybody agrees with this argument, but it does make a lot of sense to me.