More Nonsense of the New Atheists.
The new atheist claim that they have no burden of proof because atheism is not a belief but rather a non-belief. Right, atheists or no one else can or cannot proof a non-belief. Nor can they argue for or against a non-belief. In fact, you cannot even speak about a non-belief other than simply to say I do not believe. However, I know of only a handful of atheist who refuse to speak about the subject of God and they offer arguments against his existence.
If you are arguing for or against something you are not arguing from a non-belief because that is impossible. Moreover, When arguing against something, the argument “I don’t believe” is insufficient. It is an opinion, not an argument. If you argue you must be argue from some other position or ideology not a non-belief. You cannot as atheists do argue against God and then claim atheism as a non-belief. Atheists must argue against God from either materialism or naturalist ideology which are beliefs. In other words, the minute they open their mouths the burden of proof lies on the one trying to proof their un-belief by the means of other beliefs. In essence, they have to borrow believes from other ideologies to speak against the belief in God. If they don’t want any burden of proof they should simply shut their mouths and not form arguments from materialism, scientism and naturalism.
In the following video Carl Young present some material that should make the new atheist type rethink the virtue of their constant attacks on religion as though their attacks are in somehow virtuous. Young’s points out that a loss of faith and religion is the reason why so many people today are despond. Young also shows that a loss of faith tends to move a culture towards State-ism and the development and growth of a will for power in the human spirit which results in metal disorders and the totalitarian state.
In a past article I pointed out that atheism is a phenomenal which seems to take place at the end of a civilization and is one of the marks of a decaying culture. It is hard to tell whether atheism is causal or the fruit of atheism. However, either way it is not a positive force in the human community.
The End of Materialism?
Materialism is a philosophy that teaches the only thing which exists is what science call matter or energy. For the materialist there is no spirit, soul or even consciousness. As a philosophy, it represents the foundational world-view of atheism. Materialism and its birth child of atheism will never be the preeminent world view because it leaves humanity empty and without meaning. Any illusions of meaning it might offer are quickly drained by suffering, the brevity of life and him him death. Of course, there are some who have the intellectual ability to build and maintain a huge bulwark of superficial and peripheral arguments to protect their illusions of meaning. The most that can be said about these arguments is that they divert people’s attention away from reality onto their quibbles, which seems to work fairly well for those who have very little expectations of life. This is one of the biggest problems and dangers of atheism; it has the tendency to hollow out people and diminish their expectations or hopes for the future or life in general, which in turn precipitates an existential crisis that often leads to nihilism.
In his classic book “The Denial of Death”, Ernest Becker points out that humanity denies its death by creating illusions. He claims that one of these delusions is religion, but he acknowledges that it’s just one among many. The most typical method of delusion is simply to force the idea of death to the back of your mind. Most humans are so well-practiced at this deception that they do it with very little effort or consciousness.
In fact, it has been my experience that people of faith think and talk about death more than the non-religious. In this, they demonstrate more of a grasp on reality, at least in this one area, greater than the non-religious. The secular man appears to avoid the issue of death altogether, which seems to be a far deeper form of denial, than trusting in an afterlife.
Of course, you must demonstrate that religion is false, not just flawed, before you can totally dismiss it as a delusion, which Becker doesn’t attempt. However, in his conclusion Becker does demonstrate the utilitarianism of religion and affirms that religion does work well in dealing with the fear of death. This dispels the shallow idea of the new atheist type that says religion poisons everything and intrinsically has no value.
The end of materialism can be seen throughout the west and especially in eastern Europe where we have a preview of its demise in Russia where materialism was forced on the population by an atheistic government for decades, at which point it left the populace hollowed out and empty. The Russian model of materialism demonstrates the unworkable and the destructive nature of materialism and the atheism that follows.
I personally feel that the biggest problem with materialism is that no one can live as though they really believed it. If consistent, the materialist must also be a determinist and deny the free will of man and I have yet to see a man live as though he is a slave to the mindless movement of matter. One of my pragmatic friends put it this way; “I’ve never known a man that didn’t look both ways before crossing a street.” You cannot live a consistent life and be a materialist.