It never ceases to amaze me many apologists confuse consistency with entailment: they will use words like “nihilism is consistent with atheism” when what they mean is “atheism entails nihilism.” The problem, however, is that the former is uninteresting while the latter is false.— Secular Outpost (@SecularOutpost) January 31, 2019
i) Jeff doesn't bother to study what his own side is saying. This isn't just a Christian interpretation of atheism, but what many atheist thinkers admit. That's something I've documented in detail.
ii) In addition, I've presented arguments for how atheism entails moral and existential nihilism.
iii) Perhaps Jeff is using "atheism" in the artificial sense of nonbelief in the divine.
iv) But suppose for discussion purposes that we agree with Jeff. Is it "uninteresting" that atheism is consistent with nihilism? If someone tells me to my face that as an atheist, his viewpoint is consistent with raping little girls or torturing elderly women for fun, that's a very revealing statement.
Atheists complain that many Americans don't trust atheists. But if atheism is consistent with nihilism, what better reason not to trust an atheist. Would you feel safe sleeping in the same room with someone whose viewpoint is consistent with vivisecting human beings?
Atheists complain that many Americans don't trust atheists.
ReplyDeleteThe ironic thing is that studies suggest that atheists tend to not trust other atheists:
Atheists tend to be seen as immoral – even by other atheists: study
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/07/anti-atheist-prejudice-secularity
Atheists Don’t Even Trust Other Atheists
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/benjamin-wiker/atheists-dont-even-trust-other-atheists
And here is another twist to this point: if atheism is consistent with nihilism, then any atheist could be a shameless liar, thereby also potentially lying about the fact that atheism does not entail nihilism (or lying about anything else for that matter). Consequently, it seems that until and unless I have good evidence for a particular atheist's trustworthiness or at least for the fact that the atheist is not a nihilist, I should not believe a thing he says. However, since a nihilist atheist could be lying about not being nihilist, could I ever rationally believe anything he says, seeing as he could always be lying about it. Thus, for atheists, it seems rational to hold to a presumption of suspicion rather than a presumption of honesty.
ReplyDeleteTiL that atheists have nihilism and thus may very well be lying, which puts them about par with Dawagandists who have taqiyya/Allah is the greatest makr.
Delete