Strategy for defeating a weak atheist

[Guest guest]

Pamho, agtSP!

 

I would like some response to this texts. Thank you all!

 

Ys, AKD

 

Strategy for defeating a weak atheist

By Ajita Krishna Dasa

 

 

Definitions:

 

Weak atheist: States that he has a lack of belief in God. Does not actively

believe that God does not exist.

 

Strong atheist: States that God does not exist. He actively believes that

God does not exist

 

Many times weak atheists (also called implicit, negative or defensive

atheists) are really strong atheists. They actually believe that there is no

God. But because they know strong atheism is impossible to prove, they hide

behind weak atheism, because a weak atheist is defined as one who just has a

lack of belief in God. The weak atheist does'nt assert that there is no God,

he simply asserts that since the theist claims who that God exist, then it

is also the theist who must prove his claim, and until that proof has been

provided then the weak atheist, and everyone else, can't accept the claim

that God exist.

 

Using this as a strategy the weak atheist, who is many times a strong

atheist, tries to refute all the different kinds of evidence for God put

forward by the theists, so he can continue being an atheist. No matter what

argument you put forward the weak atheist will claim that it is illogical or

just not good enough. The weak atheist will most likely also refer to

standard arguments against the existence of God and claim that they provide

good evidence against God.

 

As we know from the Vedic literature we can't absolutely prove God by

logical and empirical means, so therefore there's always a loophole for the

atheist. In such a debate you can maybe convince open minded readers that

your arguments for God and against atheism is better then the atheists

arguments, but you will never convince the hard hearted atheists and close

minded sceptics.

 

However, there are different strategies by which you can trap the weak

atheist, for example by forcing him into a situation were he has to assert

something about the world. Any assertion must be supported by evidence, and

that's were the trouble start for the atheist. The following is some of the

strategies I have used in my debates with weak atheists.

 

Question to the weak atheist: Why are you an atheist?

 

Atheistic answer 1: There is a lack of evidence for God

 

How to challenge the answer:

 

- Can you prove that to be true?

- Have you seen all proclaimed evidences for God?

- Are you qualified to evaluate all existing proclaimed evidence for God?

(the atheist must implicitly presume this)

- How is it possible to know that there's exist no evidence for God

somewhere in the universe, or even just on this planet Earth?

- You have to be allknowing to verify the truth value of your assertion

- In other words you have to be God in order to use this assertion against

God, which is self-contradictory.

 

Atheistic answer 2: No one has seen or experienced God

 

How to challenge the answer:

 

- Can you prove that to be true?

- Have you spoking with every single human being in the past and present?

- Do you know if there's other living beings in the universe, and if there

is if they have also not seen God?

- You have to be allknowing in order to be sure that you have access to all

the knowledge of all the living being that exist or might exist in the

universe

- In other words you have to be God in order to be sure that no one has seen

God

 

Atheistic answer 3: It's impossible to prove the existence of God

 

How to challenge the answer:

 

- Can you prove that to be true?

- Have you seen all proclaimed evidences?

- Are you qualified to evaluate all the proclaimed evidence for God?

- Have you spoking with every single human being in the past and present, so

that you can know that none of them can prove God?

- Do you know if there's other living beings in the universe, and if there

is if they also can't prove the existence of God?

- You have to have knowledge about every person in the past and present in

the whole universe to be sure that none of them can prove God.

 

Reversing the burden of proof

 

Sometimes the debate goes something like this;

 

Theist: Why are you an atheist?

Atheist: Because there are no proofs for God

Theist: Can you prove that?

Atheist: I don't have to prove that because you are the one asserting the

existence of God, so the burden of proof is on you.

 

Such an atheist have misunderstood the burden of proof. The statement ”there

is no proofs for God” is a statement about how the arrangement of the world,

and therfore it needs to be supported by evidence just as much as the

statement ”God exist” or ”There exist proof for God.” Unfortunately for the

atheist it's, as shown above, impossible to prove.

 

To say that it is all right to assert that there is no proofs for a given

object as long as no one has given a proof for the existence of that object

is a logical fallacy called an appeal to ignorance (argumentum ad

ignorantiam.) See

http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/fallacies.htm#Appeal%20to%20Ignorance

 

Be aware that the weak atheist will most probably freak out and start to

call you names, attack your religion, divert to an other subject matter,

call his friends for help etc. But don't let yourself be diverted. Keep

hammering on the same question and don't go any further on your list, or to

other matter, before the atheist has answered your question. Prabhupada

never allowed anyone to get away with such things. If you do that he will be

forced to admit, but most likely not publicly, that he can't prove his

assertions, and you will send him in the isolation booth for some time.

 

To be continued...