Strong atheism

Strong atheism or positive atheism is the lack of belief in any gods with the strong conviction that no gods exist. Strong atheism is in contrast to weak atheism, in which the atheist does not believe in any particular gods but does not assert that they do not exist, and theism, in which the theist asserts that there is at least one god of some kind. Strong atheism is almost always irreconcilable with agnosticism. The terms atheist and atheism are usually, but not always, used to indicate "strong atheism". The difference between "strong" and "weak" atheism might be summed up as follows: strong atheism is the belief in the lack of any god, while weak atheism is the lack of belief in any god. Some strong atheists qualify their position by stating what specific conception of god they believe does not exist. They may believe that specific gods, such as the Judeo-Christian-Muslim god, do not exist, based on the description of the gods provided by their followers. They may believe certain gods to be logically impossible based on these descriptions, or they may be swayed by one or many of the arguments against the existence of certain conceptions of god (eg, the problem of evil). Such atheists would believe that such gods do not or cannot exist, but might consider themselves weak atheists with regard to certain other conceptions of gods or to other gods in general.

Common criticisms and strong atheist responses

Some weak atheists and agnostics view strong atheism as just as untenable a position as theism. That is, they think that to positively believe that no god exists requires some sort of “faith,” as the nonexistence of gods cannot be proven. While it is true that gods cannot be proven to not exist, they fail to understand the very important distinction between the assertions of strong atheists and theists. Strong atheism essentially takes the view that we live in a world where existence is determined rationally through science and observation. Therefore, it is the default belief of many strong atheists that things that cannot be observed and tested and proven to exist beyond a reasonable doubt do not exist. This sentiment was expressed somewhat stridently by biologist Richard Dawkins in the following paragraph:

"Agnostic conciliation, which is the decent liberal bending over backward to concede as much as possible to anybody who shouts loud enough, reaches ludicrous lengths in the following common piece of sloppy thinking. It goes roughly like this: You can't prove a negative (so far so good). Science has no way to disprove the existence of a supreme being (this is strictly true). Therefore, belief or disbelief in a supreme being is a matter of pure, individual inclination, and both are therefore equally deserving of respectful attention! When you say it like that, the fallacy is almost self-evident; we hardly need spell out the reductio ad absurdum. As my colleague, the physical chemist Peter Atkins, puts it, we must be equally agnostic about the theory that there is a teapot in orbit around the planet Pluto. We can't disprove it. But that doesn't mean the theory that there is a teapot is on level terms with the theory that there isn't." [1]

Another argument for strong atheism as opposed to weak atheism is the idea that refusing to believe in the nonexistence of gods while believing in the nonexistence of ghosts, Santa Claus, or the allegorical Invisible Pink Unicorn is an inconsistent point of view. Strong atheists believe that the existence of gods is no more likely or reasonable to believe in than the existence of these other beings, and therefore that to be a weak atheist one must either also refuse to believe in the nonexistence of such creatures or grant gods special consideration (believe that the very idea of gods is somehow greater or better than the idea of ghosts, Santa Claus, etc). Strong atheists refuse to do either. Related to this refusal to grant the idea of gods special consideration, and the reason many atheists do, is the similar nature of early belief in gods and early beliefs in ghosts, goblins, and other fantastical creatures. All of these beings are seen as having been created to explain natural events that early humans had no explanation for (also known as the god of the gaps) or as manifestations of human emotions. As the belief in all had common origins, though the belief in gods has since evolved, it is foolish to many strong atheists to believe that the idea of gods must be given special consideration. Category:Atheism and agnosticism\n