Philosophy of Philosophy of AtheismAtheism

So let’s define our termsSo let’s define our termsWhat atheism---at least within this What atheism---at least within this

class---is class---is notnot::1. A form of Devil / Evil Spirit worship (there is no such worship of anything in atheism!)

2. A mere reaction to religious extremism (though there is a connection)---we’re concerned with epistemology, not politics

3. The idea that God’s existence can be disproven

This is NOT the right attitude!

So what So what ISIS atheism? atheism?Very simply, a Very simply, a lacklack of a belief in a God. of a belief in a God.

Consider Consider these two propositions:these two propositions:

1. I actively believe God does not exist.1. I actively believe God does not exist.2. I do not (yet) hold the belief that God exists.2. I do not (yet) hold the belief that God exists.

What is the difference between these two What is the difference between these two beliefs?beliefs?

Proposition 1Proposition 1I actively believe God does not exist.I actively believe God does not exist.

Proposition 1 assumes that there is evidence to Proposition 1 assumes that there is evidence to guarantee guarantee

the conclusion that God does not exist. This however is the conclusion that God does not exist. This however is impossible. No amount of evidence could ever impossible. No amount of evidence could ever

guarantee guarantee this, just in the same way that no amount of evidence this, just in the same way that no amount of evidence could guarantee that a black swan doesn’t exist. There could guarantee that a black swan doesn’t exist. There might be one, and we simply haven’t found it yet! It is a might be one, and we simply haven’t found it yet! It is a deductive truth that one can deductive truth that one can nevernever gather enough gather enough

evidence evidence to to proveprove a non-existential claim. a non-existential claim.

Proposition 2Proposition 2I do not (yet) hold the belief that God I do not (yet) hold the belief that God

exists.exists.

Proposition 2 allows for the belief in a God, Proposition 2 allows for the belief in a God, and and

the burden of proof rests with those who claim the burden of proof rests with those who claim He does exist.He does exist.

THIS is how we will understand atheism.THIS is how we will understand atheism.

So what about ‘‘God’’ So what about ‘‘God’’ then?then?

There are There are manymany conceptions about what it means to be a ‘‘God.’’ conceptions about what it means to be a ‘‘God.’’ We We

will use Daniel Dennett’s conception for the purpose of this class:will use Daniel Dennett’s conception for the purpose of this class:

If what [some people] call God is really not an agent in their eyes, a

Being that can answer prayers, approve and disapprove, receive sacrifices,

And mete out punishment or forgiveness, then, although they may

call this Being God, and stand in awe of it (not Him), their creed, whatever it is, is not really a religion according to my definition (Dennett, 2007,

p.10).

So, what it means to be a god is to be a supernatural agent, and what it means to be religious is to avow belief in said agent and

seek his or her approval.

Short digression…Short digression…

Should religiosity be construed along the lines of Should religiosity be construed along the lines of belief or behaviour? Why?belief or behaviour? Why?

Genetic OriginsGenetic Origins

Evolution: How does it work?

Three criteria:• Replication• Variation• Competition

RELATIVE TO A SPECIFIC

ENVIRONMENT

The Intentional StanceThe Intentional StanceA tendency to assume there is agency A tendency to assume there is agency

where there where there is in fact none. This is evolutionarily is in fact none. This is evolutionarily

beneficial beneficial because it keeps you out of trouble!because it keeps you out of trouble!

Let’s consider 2 examples…Let’s consider 2 examples…

Example 1:Example 1: You are at home late at night and are You are at home late at night and are

feeling tired. You switch off all the lights feeling tired. You switch off all the lights and crawl into bed. As you lie there and and crawl into bed. As you lie there and your eyes adjust to the darkness, a dark, your eyes adjust to the darkness, a dark, humanoid form becomes slowly visible humanoid form becomes slowly visible in the corner of the room. Terrified, you in the corner of the room. Terrified, you ask ‘‘Who’s there?!’’ before gathering ask ‘‘Who’s there?!’’ before gathering enough courage to switch on the light. enough courage to switch on the light. To your surprise and relief, a To your surprise and relief, a mannequin stands in the corner---it was mannequin stands in the corner---it was put there as a prank by your significant put there as a prank by your significant other and got the exact reaction out of other and got the exact reaction out of you that was intended!you that was intended!

Example 2:Example 2:

The hunter-gatherer scours the forest The hunter-gatherer scours the forest floor in search of nuts and berries. floor in search of nuts and berries. Suddenly, he hears a rustling in the Suddenly, he hears a rustling in the leaves. This frightens him greatly and leaves. This frightens him greatly and without further ado he runs away, without further ado he runs away, startled. Little did he know that all it startled. Little did he know that all it was was a harmless sloth!was was a harmless sloth!

So what does this show So what does this show us?us?

Imagine in example 1 instead of a mannequin Imagine in example 1 instead of a mannequin it it

was a murderer.was a murderer.

Imagine in example 2 instead of a sloth it was Imagine in example 2 instead of a sloth it was a a

tiger.tiger.

‘‘‘‘Better Safe Than Sorry!’’ – Nature’s mottoBetter Safe Than Sorry!’’ – Nature’s motto

So…So…Question: Question: If there is an evolutionarily beneficial trait If there is an evolutionarily beneficial trait responsible for detecting agency where responsible for detecting agency where

there really there really is none, then how is that related to is none, then how is that related to

religion?religion?

DiscussDiscuss

The Gullible Child BrainThe Gullible Child BrainTheoretically, children might learn from personal experience not to go too near a cliff edge, not to eat untried red berries, not to swim in crocodile infestedwaters. But, to say the least, there will be a selective advantage to child brains that possess the rule of

thumb: believe, without question, whatever your grown-ups

tell you. —Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

p.174

Rob’s Childhood…Rob’s Childhood…1.1. - ‘‘Don’t run out onto a busy road!’’- ‘‘Don’t run out onto a busy road!’’ - ‘‘Why?’’- ‘‘Why?’’ - ‘‘Because you’ll get knocked down!’’- ‘‘Because you’ll get knocked down!’’

2. - ‘‘Don’t jump into the deep water!’’

- ‘‘Why?’’

- ‘‘Because you’ll drown!’’

Would I have been better able to Would I have been better able to pass on my genes if I required good pass on my genes if I required good solid evidence in support of those solid evidence in support of those commands? Probably not! In some commands? Probably not! In some ways, child minds are like ways, child minds are like computers; both their effectiveness computers; both their effectiveness and inefficiency results from the and inefficiency results from the same thing: they (mostly) do same thing: they (mostly) do exactlyexactly what they are told.what they are told.

An accidental An accidental convergence?convergence?

Could it possibly be that religion is an Could it possibly be that religion is an accident? The combination of 1. our accident? The combination of 1. our tendency to ascribe agency where there in tendency to ascribe agency where there in fact is none, and 2. the ‘‘slavish gullibility’’ fact is none, and 2. the ‘‘slavish gullibility’’ of our child minds?of our child minds?

(Consider, as a parallel, the ‘‘self-immolation (Consider, as a parallel, the ‘‘self-immolation behaviour’’ exhibited by moths)behaviour’’ exhibited by moths)

DiscussDiscuss

God Center?God Center? Many neuroscientists and philosophers have Many neuroscientists and philosophers have

brought up the idea of a God ‘center’ in the brought up the idea of a God ‘center’ in the brain---some sort of area in the brain that is brain---some sort of area in the brain that is responsible for why we believe in God. Maybe it’s responsible for why we believe in God. Maybe it’s because we find comfort? Maybe it’s something because we find comfort? Maybe it’s something else. However, if religious belief is an else. However, if religious belief is an accidentaccident then it would seem there is no God ‘center,’ but a then it would seem there is no God ‘center,’ but a God God junctionjunction---the point where our gullible ---the point where our gullible childish mentality and the tendency to adopt the childish mentality and the tendency to adopt the intentional stance meet.intentional stance meet.

DiscussDiscuss

Suggested Suggested ReadingReading

Dennett, D. C. (2007). Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. Penguin.

Dawkins, R. (2007). The God Delusion (New ed.). Black Swan.

Hitchens, C. (2008). God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. AtlanticBooks.Harris, S.

(2006a). The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (Newed.). Free Press.