Being Atheist Doesn’t Make You Smart, Rational, Or Logical June 14, 2012Posted by Metabiological in Science.
Tags: atheism, logic, religion, science
Atheists, my people, we must talk. I’ve been noticing a disturbing trend making it’s way through the atheist community, a trend which quite frankly needs to stop. See in my off time I sometimes enjoy perusing discussion boards and internet forums on the subject of religion and atheism (something I keep telling myself I’m going to stop doing.) It’s enjoyable sometimes because occasionally I see an argument put forward by the other side that I hadn’t considered before, something which forces me to do a little self-examining and make my own arguments stronger. All too often though all I get out of it is a laugh watching one bad and discounted argument after another being rolled out by people who at this point ought to know better.
The problem is that recently I haven’t been laughing since it’s my side throwing up the stupid arguments.
Now before I get too far into this I don’t need anyone to remind that this being the internet the level of discourse is generally somewhere between two kindergarteners fighting over a crayon and the average American Presidential debate (ooh, topical) and that I really shouldn’t be expecting great debates in that forum. Unfortunately that argument does not apply in this case.
See that problem I’ve been noticing is that atheists in these debates love to talk about how logical and rational they and their positions are all the while behaving in a completely irrational and illogical manner. If we’re going to pride ourselves on the soundness of our arguments then we need to ensure that we are actually making sound arguments and we don’t get to use the excuse of the Internet Fuckwad Theory to cover up our own shortcomings. As such I would like to humbly propose the following list of things atheists really need to stop doing.
1) Being atheist does not make you smart
Or rational and logical. Yes I know we all saw that one study that seemed to say otherwise but I would be very hesitant about bringing up something so controversial and with it’s own fair share of issues. Even if the findings of that study turn out to be true it will only be talking about averages (i.e. the average atheist is smarter than the average believer) not that you are smarter than the average believer.
Telling a person that because they believe in a god they must be so stupid as to not understand you’re arguments not only makes you look like a pompous ass but also only manages to alienate anyone you might be debating with. If your intention was to bring them over to your side then that is the exact opposite of what you should be doing. It also ignores the fact that their have been many smart people throughout history who have believed in a god and in a way actually gives the theists an argument.
See any time the question of intelligence and religion is brought up it’s almost inevitable that someone will eventually say “But Einstein believed in God (or Newton/Descartes/Galilaeo/etc.) Are you saying you’re smarter than Einstein?” This is a pretty popular comeback since it appeals to the logical fallacy we seem to like the most; appeals to authority. The truth is most people debating about religion (or for that matter climate change/evolution/etc.) on the internet don’t actually understand the topic well enough to be debating it in the first place. As such any opportunity to bring in the word of someone more versed in the subject than they are is a welcome relief since it allows them to score a point without having to actually make an argument. This is doubly annoying since as anyone with a basic background in logic knows the veracity of an argument is not based on the intelligence of the person arguing it but on the strength of the evidence in its favor. Bringing up much smarter, more rational and more logical you are isn’t only a fallacy in itself but will almost certainly perpetuate more fallacies.
2) Stop misusing the word logical
This is one that really gets to me because I see it everywhere. I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen a person attack a religion for not being “based on logic” at the same time implicating that atheism is a logical belief. Often this is said in the manner of a winning argument as if the person thinks they have made some grand insight which cannot be countered. Hate to break it to you but all you’ve done is shown that you don’t understand what the word logical means.
Quick philosophy lesson. Logic is a branch of philosophy which studies what makes an argument valid. While there are a few types the one most of us are familiar with is deductive reasoning, which generally takes the form of if x than y. A example of that might go as such:
A: All apples are fruit
B: Some apples are red.
Therefore: Some fruit is red.
The conclusion follows perfectly from the assumptions. As such, that right there is a logically valid argument. But is it true?
Some are probably saying “Of course it’s true, you just said it was valid” and therein lies the confusion. A valid argument is not necessarily a true one. All it needs to be valid is for the conclusion to follow from the premises, not that the premises be correct themselves. To illustrate that point let’s try another one.
1: All things created have a creator.
2: The Earth was created.
Therefore: The Earth has a creator.
This also is a logically valid argument and a perfect example for why attacking religion as illogical is a terrible debating tactic. Religions can and have produced many perfectly valid arguments for the truth of their beliefs based on the assumptions of their faith. While we can certainly attack the truthfulness of their assumption speaking of religions as illogical only exposes our own ignorance. Speaking of ignorance…
3) Quit parroting arguments you heard from someone else
Let me be very clear what I’m talking about here. I do not mean utilizing arguments you read about elsewhere for yourself. Nothing wrong with learning from another, that is after all one of the best ways to learn. What I’m talking about is when the only argument you can muster is entirely made up by other people. Or to put it succinctly let’s construct an imaginary (though in truth very common) exchange.
Person 1: Atheists have faith just like theists.
Person 2: Whatever, atheism is like religion the way bald is a hair color.
Do you see the problem there? Simply quoting a popular saying does not advance the conversation. It does not add to the debate. It doesn’t even show that you understand what you’re debating about. All it shows is that you are capable of memorizing an internet meme. Again there’s nothing wrong with using the ideas of others in you argument but you have to actually make an argument.
Well I think that will do for now. Honestly there are probably a few more that could be added to this list but perhaps I’ll save those for another time. Happy debating!