Atheism is Easy

There have been so many different kinds of philosophers over the years. On so many issues. Whether it is philosophy of mind, political philosophy, economics, ethics, and so forth. Many great scientists in the past and present. All of these people disagree with one another on some issue. Always there is disagreement with people on these kinds of questions.

But there is almost one unanimous issue that every serious thinker has agreed with. That religion is false. Almost every philosopher, scientist, and rational thinker will agree with this conclusion. They might not all necessarily be atheists, though most are, but among those that are not, they are still not religious. Of course, I am not saying that because these people say that religion is false it follows that religion is false. That would be a terrible argument. I have arguments on this site that explain why religion is false. But my point rather is that atheism is simple.

Coming to the conclusion of atheism is actually one of the simplest intellectual accomplishments in a person's life. It is the starting path of any rational thinker. Beyond that questions become more and more complicated which is why there is more and more disagreement on the more complicated questions. But the starting point, religion, is nearly unanimously rejected by all serious thinkers. Even during the religious history of mankind the rational thinkers were prepared to go against fundamental religious teachings. Galileo and Newton were not atheists, I will not deny that. But Galileo was nonetheless prepared to violate the basic religious teachings for the sake of determining the truth. Newton, though marveled at God through the study of physics, rejected the trinity entirely. Nearly all rational thinkers first must have done battle against religion and defeated it, either by rejecting it entirely or committing heresy.

This is why some time ago, not so long ago, after I was a skeptic for a significant period of my life, I started to despise the "atheist movement" or whatever it should be called. Because I realized that many atheists have this attitude that because they are atheists it therefore follows they are smart and religious people are dumb. For example, the Bill Maher attitude. Now I like Bill Maher even though there are a lot of fundamental issues I disagree with him on. But one thing about Bill that really bothers me is his attitude that because someone is an atheist it follows that the person is smart and that because someone is a theist it follows that the person is dumb. Of course he does not really believe in this false principle, he is too smart to believe in it. However, his attitude testifies to this idea. I seen many of his programs when he refutes a conservative not by explaining why his conservative policies are wrong but rather by saying, "why should we listen to this guy, he after all believes in an imaginary being in the sky". It is not only Bill Maher, it is many other atheists who have the same attitude. I keep on seeing atheists constantly who oppose people who they disagree with essentially because those people are theists. This is why I always hated Thunderf00t on YouTube and still hate him. His fans think he is some towering intellectual because he can refute people who believe in imaginary being? He is an intellectual because he can refute people who believe the world was magically created? That is not an intellectual accomplishment because atheism is the easiest intellectual accomplishment in the world. It only means he is smarter than an average person. But he is far from possessing an intellectual respect from me on those issues alone.

So I started to despise the atheist movement when I realized this. I also despised it because it should not be called "atheist movement" but rather "skeptic movement". Atheism is pointless, skepticism is the key. Skepticism is the method, atheism is only a conclusion. Singling out atheism over skepticism misses the entire point. But I changed my attitude again. I no longer hate the atheist movement and am supportive of it. Because I realized that with all of its drawbacks as I explained above it still have an important function. I became a skeptic precisely because I was influenced by the atheist movement. Thus, it is unfair for me to hope for its destruction when I was influenced by it. I will have to put up with the problems inherent in the atheist movement for a more important purpose, and that is freeing people's mind from tyranny.