Saturday, May 3, 2014

Silly Argument: "Atheism Is The Default Position"

I got hit with that one a short while back. A Village Atheist in an internet forum was spouting off the tired "All babies are born Atheists" meme, and then he tried to defend the meme with that comment.

Non-belief isn't a default, ignorance is. Belief or lack of it is a conscious decision.

For millennia, belief in an eternal universe was the "default position". In the early 20th Century, it was discovered that the Universe was finite. The "default position" was wrong, proving that it isn't inherently true.

In fact, the default position is often "ignorance".

The fact that God may be outside of our ability to prove His existence doesn't validate the "default position".

For Atheists, their "default position" is faith-based.

Ouch. I know how much Atheists hate to hear that.


JBsptfn said...

There was a hayseed on Metacrock's blog (Atheist Watch) that said that one time (about people being born atheist):

God Particle and God Talk

Look at the comments section, and look for a guy named Bill Walker (he also supports the luminary-filled site

Anonymous said...

Gods are made up fairy tales, you silly.

Stoogie said...

When will you or any other Atheist prove that assertion?

Logic Lad said...


Just saw this issue on another site and it all comes down to definition of the word atheist.
If you think it means ‘active denial of any deity’ then you are correct in that an ignorant child / person cannot be an atheist. This is however a non-standard definition of the word, anti-theist would be closer to this definition. The most generally accepted and universal definition is ‘a lack of belief in any deity’ given this as the definition then as an ignorant baby / person lacks a belief in a deity then they are atheists.

Lack of belief does not need a conscious decision. If you are unaware of something then you cannot believe in it. If you had never heard of any religion then you would have no word to describe your lack of belief, however a third party with knowledge would describe you as an atheist.

Stoogie said ‘For millennia, belief in an eternal universe was the "default position". In the early 20th Century, it was discovered that the Universe was finite. The "default position" was wrong, proving that it isn't inherently true’

I am not aware that anyone is claiming that a default position has be inherently true, please provide a quote of anyone, except yourself, saying so.

Stoogie said ‘The fact that God may be outside of our ability to prove His existence doesn't validate the "default position".’

So your inability to prove the existence of dragons means that they clearly must exist?

Stoogie said ‘For Atheists, their "default position" is faith-based’

This depends on your definition, as I said above, I assume you maintain that your ‘adragonist’
position is faith based?

While the drive by posting by Anonymous is a bit pointless your response continues to show that you don’t understand the traditional atheist position, that of holding the null hypothesis. Theism needs to present evidence that it is a more accurate model of the universe than atheism is, until then the ‘default’ atheism is the logical position to hold. Theists are making the truth claim, atheist are just refusing to accept that truth claim without sufficient evidence.

Logic Lad said...


To be an athiest is to lack a belief in a god. You cannot belive in something you have never heard of, ergo someone who has never heard of god is an athiest. Admittedly they would have no word for it but a third party would be able to describe them as such.

There are some athiest who adopt the faith position that there is no god however they would be more accurately described as anti-thiests. However as atheism is abroad descriptor you should probably avoid lumping them all together.

And, sorry, the burden of proof lies with the claimant. You claim there is a god. You proove it.

Stoogie said...

Logic Lad, it still boils down to faith on your part until you provide evidence that contradicts any possibility of the existence of God. You'd need to show that the existence of such a being is impossible.
Until then, you make an opinion based on what you accept as evidence. It's the best you have.

Anonymous said...

Once again, the burden of proof is on you. You can keep ignoring that, but it will always be there.

This is the sloppiest excuse for a blog that I have ever seen. Not only is it sloppy, but it's filled with people giving you logical arguments. Arguments that you basically reply to with your fingers in your ears "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER MUH FAITH"

What a joke. lol

I'll use your own logic against you: So there's an underground city. Residing in this city are a group of highly intelligent mice that are plotting to (and will soon have the capabilities to) take over the surface of Earth. We will find ourselves slaves to these mice, and will be forced to run in large human sized wheels to power their megacities.

It's true unless you can prove it isn't! Better start digging.

Stoogie said...

I just love it when a brave soul as yourself posts anonymously and throws a tantrum here.
I'm agnostic on super mice. Could you show me your evidence?
By the way, when you show your proof that your lack of belief is more than an assumption, you're welcome to come back and post it here.

Bob said...

"Belief or lack of it is a conscious decision."

It's not a decision at all. You don't 'choose' to believe anything. You are convinced, compelled, informed, influenced, etc... but certainly not choosing. You cannot 'choose' to believe something you know is false for instance. Belief is more like a feeling that makes you express what you think about a certain proposition.

Therefore, people don't 'choose' to be Atheists. They are not convinced by the claims of people who say: "There is but 1 God and His name is [insert your preference]". Similarly, some people who grew up believing in God realize at some point that they don't believe anymore. They don't suddenly choose 1 day to be an Atheist. They also cannot even possibly be 'choose' to become agnostic, which refers to knowledge. Very few would claim they 'know' whether God exists or not without proper definition.

But this is all obvious right, I guess the author of this blog is just too dumb to get it... no wonder he called his blog like that. Oh well... Next!!

Stoogie said...


You shot your own argument in the foot. You DO choose to believe something, based on the evidence. The only thing that compels you to believe anything is that which is irrefutable, like 1+1 = 2. To say that belief isn't a choice negates the whole concept of faith to begin with.

Atheists like Bob here will never admit their position takes faith. They will always speak in absolutes because they cannot process the notion that they may be wrong. This blog demonstrates that again and again.