Intellectuals on why they don't believe in God

[Humes fork]

From New Statesman, includes Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, Stephen Hawking and many others.

Some say that one reason not to believe in God is because the idea seems childish. I think that's a bad reason - there are other facts that are counter-intuitive (the theory of relativity for instance). If the faithies can provide some evidence for their deity, then I'm prepared to believe, however childish that deity may turn out to be.

 

[Sun Countess]

I think there is something childish to the notion that there's a supreme father in the sky, looking after you, willing to smite your enemies, etc. A lot of the language that grown people use when talking about their god is similar to the language a child uses when speaking about his father, from "Well, my god is tougher than your god!" to "Just wait till you're dead and god hears about this!" (The sentiment is certainly there if not the phrasing. ) If you can't take care of your own business, you'll just sic your god-daddy on your problems.


I had to go a Catholic wedding a couple of years ago and I honestly wanted to stand up and say, "You people are supposed to be grown-ups! When are you going to outgrow this nonsense?!?" Since there is no evidence to believe in this stuff which most people only believe because it was taught to them as children, I think it's fair to point out that the belief is literally a childish one. It's also symbolically childish as noted above. It's childish to believe in Santa Claus, and it's equally childish to believe in father-god figures.

I agree with you that there are other reasons not to believe, but I think it's also fair to point out that the emperor has no clothes.

 

[EventHorizon]

I think there is something childish to the notion that there's a supreme father in the sky, looking after you, willing to smite your enemies, etc. A lot of the language that grown people use when talking about their god is similar to the language a child uses when speaking about his father, from "Well, my god is tougher than your god!" to "Just wait till you're dead and god hears about this!" (The sentiment is certainly there if not the phrasing. ) If you can't take care of your own business, you'll just sic your god-daddy on your problems.


I had to go a Catholic wedding a couple of years ago and I honestly wanted to stand up and say, "You people are supposed to be grown-ups! When are you going to outgrow this nonsense?!?" Since there is no evidence to believe in this stuff which most people only believe because it was taught to them as children, I think it's fair to point out that the belief is literally a childish one. It's also symbolically childish as noted above. It's childish to believe in Santa Claus, and it's equally childish to believe in father-god figures.

I agree with you that there are other reasons not to believe, but I think it's also fair to point out that the emperor has no clothes.

I agree with this completely. I came here to say something similar but this is much better than what I had in mind.

 

[Mudcat]

The descriptions of God from the faithful (disregarding the angry drunk and the cruel and abusive parts) sounds a lot like a very young child's belief of their own earthly parents (perfect, all knowing, etc). So yes, God beliefs are indeed 'childish'.

 

[wolfgirl]

I totally agree on the childish aspect of belief. It just seems something that should by all rights be outgrown at some point in one's life.

Similar to Sun Countess' experience at a wedding, I get the same feeling at funerals when they go on and on about the deceased being with Jesus now and having all sorts of wonderful things. I know that it's comforting to the survivors, but I can't help but think, "Can these people really belief this stuff? That their loved one is prancing around a meadow with Jesus? Seriously?" When my mom died, I just thought, oh, she's gone, I will miss her so much, I will try to keep her memory alive, etc. I didn't picture her playing piano in heaven, much as that would have been nice to believe.

 

[slingblade]

Have to chime in with agreement for the "childishness" of it. It just seems so ridiculous to me now, and I used to be a rabid thumper! So glad I finally outgrew it.

 

[Dayan81]

There is no scientific evidence that supports the existence of the God of the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Bahgavad Gita, or any other religious scripture.

So if there is no true evidence why exactly should people who cherish science & evidence believe in such an entity?

 

[Beerina]

Proof would make me literally believe God existed.

I still wouldn't worship the baby-raping ass*, though.






* Through inaction.

 

[wolfgirl]

This is my very favorite:

A C Grayling
Philosopher
I do not believe that there are any such things as gods and goddesses, for exactly the same reasons as I do not believe there are fairies, goblins or sprites, and these reasons should be obvious to anyone over the age of ten.

The others may be more intellectual, deep, scientific, etc., but this one conveys everything I think about the whole thing so succinctly.

 

[Tricky]

There is no scientific evidence that supports the existence of the God of the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Bahgavad Gita, or any other religious scripture.

So if there is no true evidence why exactly should people who cherish science & evidence believe in such an entity?

Because people are complex and cannot be pigeonholed into one single chain of thought. Environment and upbringing are quite capable of overriding logic and evidence. Surely you are aware of this.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I wouldn't call god myths, childish. But I would call them primitive.

 

[Dayan81]

Because people are complex and cannot be pigeonholed into one single chain of thought. Environment and upbringing are quite capable of overriding logic and evidence. Surely you are aware of this.

This is why I do not consider the belief in God to be an irrational nor illogical one by most people on this Earth. We believe in ghosts, goblins, monsters and spirits as children. These beliefs are then converted and funneled into a belief in God by our parents. A belief is not irrational nor illogical if no amount of analysis and thinking went into the development of such beliefs.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

A belief is not irrational nor illogical if no amount of analysis and thinking went into the development of such beliefs.

Irrational means 'without reason', not 'against reason'. Illogical means 'lack of logic', not 'faulty logic'.

You can't be rational and logical without thinking and analyzing. Therefore, a belief cannot be rational and logical if no thinking and analysis was applied to it. If it is not rational or logical, then it must be irrational and illogical.

 

[westprog]

There is no scientific evidence that supports the existence of the God of the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Bahgavad Gita, or any other religious scripture.

So if there is no true evidence why exactly should people who cherish science & evidence believe in such an entity?

That's something that's very often done wrt this topic. The equation science=true is not a scientific belief. Indeed, it's an anti-scientific belief.

 

[PixyMisa]

That's something that's very often done wrt this topic. The equation science=true is not a scientific belief. Indeed, it's an anti-scientific belief.

No, it's inductive reasoning. The thing about science is, it actually works.

 

[Coolhat]

It is right there, on the name of the topic:

"Intellectuals on why they don't believe in God"

It is depressing how irrational belief is still treated as the default position.

 

[Humes fork]

I think you misunderstand me. I don't deny that the gods people believe in are childish. I just don't think that in itself should be the reason for rejection, the reason for it should be a lack of evidence. If the childish gods existed it would be counter-intuitive, but it would still be true. Just as the theory of relativity.

In all fairness, here is an article by the same guy on why some intellectuals believe in God.

Cherie Blair, barrister
It's been a journey from my upbringing to an understanding of something that my head cannot explain but my heart knows to be true.

Jeremy Vine, broadcaster
There is a subjective reason and an objective reason. The subjective reason is that I find consolation in my faith. The objective reason is that the story of the gospels has stood the test of time and Christ comes across as a totally captivating figure.

Professor Stephen R L Clark, philosopher
I believe in God because the alternatives are worse. Not believing in God would mean that we have no good reason to think that creatures such as us human beings (accidentally generated in a world without any overall purpose) have any capacity - still less any duty - to discover what the world is like.

 

[Dayan81]

That's something that's very often done wrt this topic. The equation science=true is not a scientific belief. Indeed, it's an anti-scientific belief.

On the contrary, science is based on facts. This is why there is no scientific evidence for the existence of Jesus.

There is no body, no bones & no DNA. And no one who actually heard or saw Jesus wrote about his experiences. The existence of Jesus would not stand up in any court of law.

However, a preacher in Judea named Jesus son of Joseph may have existed. But unfortunately, there is simply no hard evidence to prove it.

Did he call himself the Messiah & the Son of God? I doubt it. The late Grand-Rabbi of the Lubavitcher Hassidim never called himself the Messiah and yet tens of thousands of his followers today call him "Moshiach".

 

[caniswalensis]

From New Statesman, includes Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, PZ Myers, Michael Shermer, Stephen Hawking and many others.

Some say that one reason not to believe in God is because the idea seems childish. I think that's a bad reason - there are other facts that are counter-intuitive (the theory of relativity for instance). If the faithies can provide some evidence for their deity, then I'm prepared to believe, however childish that deity may turn out to be.

I agree that 'the idea seems childish' is a very bad reason not to believe in God. It is simply an argument from incredulity. It smacks of name calling as well.

There are good, logical reasons not to believe in a god or other supernatural entities. To say that such beliefs seem childish carries no explicative power or logic with it.
Reading through the various answers given, however, I am relieved to see that some actually touch on more logical reasons for not believing, such as the lack of objective evidence for any god. Others merely go with the incredulity arguments, which is a bad fail for anyone that has been approached with this question as an intellectual.

Although, I do not see the word 'intellectual' used in the article. They refer to the people asked the question only as 'atheists.' I think it is reasonable to assume that some atheists, in spite of being correct(imo), still have bad reasons for being so.

Regards, Canis

 

[slingblade]

I agree that 'the idea seems childish' is a very bad reason not to believe in God. It is simply an argument from incredulity. It smacks of name calling as well.

There are good, logical reasons not to believe in a god or other supernatural entities. To say that such beliefs seem childish carries no explicative power or logic with it.
Reading through the various answers given, however, I am relieved to see that some actually touch on more logical reasons for not believing, such as the lack of objective evidence for any god. Others merely go with the incredulity arguments, which is a bad fail for anyone that has been approached with this question as an intellectual.

Although, I do not see the word 'intellectual' used in the article. They refer to the people asked the question only as 'atheists.' I think it is reasonable to assume that some atheists, in spite of being correct(imo), still have bad reasons for being so.

Regards, Canis

Okay...I can't speak for others, but "childishness" wasn't my reason. It was an outgrowth of my reasoning that occurred later.

You see, when I began to seriously examine my religious belief--which had been wavering dramatically, but which I was still too afraid to let go--I started with my own version of god. Everyone who believes in any god has a different version of it from everyone else's, it seems to me.

And once I had determined the utter lack of evidence, combined with outright contradictions, impossibility, and the fact that nothing I'd ever been taught about god seemed reflected in any way by reality, I then turned to examining other god beliefs. None of them were sustainable to me.

Only after that, at some unremembered point in time, did I realize how childish the notion now seemed to me.

Not a reason; an outgrowth of reasoning. At least, for me. YMMV, as usual.

I don't think the notion actually came to me until I either read, or thought for myself, that the particular god I used to believe in was pretty much Santa for grown-ups.