“I Think I Am An Atheist”

i think i am an atheistSo your experience and observation have developed you to confess, “I think I am an atheist.”. It may be difficult to pinpoint the precise reason; perhaps you do not even know yourself. Perhaps you dislike the institution of church, perhaps you see the hypocrisy in those who call themselves Christians, perhaps your prayers are never answered, or maybe you just do not see any reason to believe that the Bible is the word of God anymore. I understand that, and I respect that.

However atheism has developed into something radically different than it was just a few decades ago. Atheists such as Bertrand Russell, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean-Paul Sartre, I am persuaded, would just be appalled at the sheer ignorance that is often displayed in atheist circles. They represented an atheism that was very unlike that which is represented today. i think i am an atheist 2Though admittedly, both are encapsulated by the philosophy that God does not exist, or that religion is a myth, or that there are no good reasons to believe. That is the core of atheism.

However, modern atheists do not understand, as their predecessors did, the gravity of atheism; how much of the world it affects. For if theism is true, especially Christian theism, compared to whether atheism is true, the world would be radically different. This is often forgotten or just not emphasized enough in atheist circles; atheists often live inconsistently with their worldview.

So I write this article as an implore: live consistently with your worldview. There are many differences, as the atheist philosophers of old understood, between a world in which God exists, and a world in which God does not exist. It is my aim to clarify those differences for you, so that you can live in accordance with your worldview. If you dislike the hypocrisy that you see in the church, you do not want to be guilty of the very same thing from an atheist stance. So consider the differences that I explain.

But prepare yourself, for the conception of the world that follows from atheism is not something to rejoice, but as Bertrand Russell said, “Only upon the firm foundation of unyielding despair can the souls’ habitation be henceforth safely built.”

What Is Value?

One man might wish a sandwich was in this bag while another would wish it was full of cash.
Suppose you were walking down the street and you found a paper bag filled with cash. Lucky day, right? That cash has meaning to you, you can go out and buy things with it. But suppose you brought that cash to a tribe in the Brazilian rainforest and you attempted to trade your cash for some of their goods. They would look at you like you were insane.

“What do I want with your paper?” they might say. To somebody who is unfamiliar with our monetary system, cash would be worth just as much as the paper bag that you are carrying it in. It is just paper, it does not have any actual value, despite that it is worth so much to the individual. Cash only has a relative value.

This same type of thinking can be applied to human beings. Consider your parents, your siblings, your spouse or significant other, your friends. Suppose somebody that you love and somebody that you do not know are both hanging from a cliff. You will save the person that you love more, because they have more value to you. But are they, in any way, intrinsically more valuable than the person that you did not save? Obviously not, they are just more valuable to you, in the same way that a $100 bill is more valuable than a paper bag to you.

But on naturalism, this person does not have any actual value. How could they? It is only how you see them, in the same way that a bird might treasure its’ eggs, but we look at them and just see dinner. The eggs and the dollar bill are intrinsically valueless, and so the same with human beings. There is nothing to grant us actual value, it is merely an illusion.

Despite that, atheists live as though human beings do have intrinsic value.

What Are Moral Values?

How could you convince a person whose favorite kind of ice cream is chocolate, to consider taking vanilla as a favorite type of ice cream? The obvious answer is that you couldn’t. You know that vanilla is better than chocolate, but they just do not agree. It comes down to their opinion.

So the same with our moral values. We know that some action is morally superior or morally inferior to another action. But how can we convince somebody who does not agree? How can I convince a cannibal who wants to kill me and feed their family, to let me go? I could tell them, “No, no! It’s wrong to kill!” to which they would reply, “Well that’s just your opinion. We don’t believe that in this house. You need to be more tolerant of opposing views.”

I say that some action is evil, and they say that the same action is good. Which of us is right? On naturalism, it is just an appeal to each persons’ opinion. Neither is truly right or wrong; all moral actions are equal, because there is no foundation for moral values and duties. This is a point that most atheists agree with, as Richard Dawkins has written, “There is at bottom, no good, no evil, nothing but pitiless indifference.”

Despite that, atheists live as if there are moral values and duties.

Where Do We End?

This is a very basic question, to which the naturalist obviously answers, “Nowhere.” To the naturalist, death is the very end. But what does that say about life?

In a relatively short time, you will perish. Your children will offer stories of you in an effort to recreate your personality. Alas, similar to a game of telephone, it will become more distorted as the generations pass. Eventually, recollections of your life will devolve in recollections of recollections of your life. It can be taken as certain: a time will come wherein nobody will know that you ever existed.

One might reply that you affected the human race in a positive manner; that while your memory has faded into irrelevancy, your positivity carries on. But to this I can only reply that this will perish as well. Mankind’s extinction can be taken as certain. The sun will incinerate the earth and all of its’ inhabitants in a relatively short time. As one philosopher has said, life is like shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. Man ends in nothing, and therefore he ultimately is nothing.

Despite that, atheists live as though their lives, their relationships, their careers, their kindness, does matter.

So You Are An Atheist

So you are an atheist. I understand that, and I respect it. But I do not want you to be like the hypocrites in your former church. Live out your atheism. Do not pretend that life has meaning when it will all be destroyed, do not pretend that there are objective moral values and duties when they are merely your opinion, and do not pretend that the people in your life have actual value when they do not.

You have abandoned theism, and with it, you abandoned all of the delusions of meaning, value, and purpose. Welcome to atheism.



Related posts

3 Thoughts to ““I Think I Am An Atheist””

  1. Allocutus


    You’re getting it the wrong way around.

    Atheists do believe in moral values. Although we don’t necessarily consider them objective (in the sense that they were given to us by some divine decision-maker as totally arbitrary and uniform ones), we do observe that people generally seem to share similar principles. We feel that it’s wrong to kill, steal, lie and rape. People of all religions and of no religion seem to share these similar values. Atheists do too. There’s no denying that. Just survey them and you’ll find out. In fact, atheists find it disappointing that Christians appear to be admitting that if the Bible didn’t forbid it, they would kill, rape and steal. We atheists find that morally disturbing.

    All humans have morality and it seems to be similar across the board. Indeed, all social animals must have some sense of a social code, orelse there would be no benefit in living in herds. And we do observe social behaviour in animals. Morality is a perfectly natural thing. Is it objective? No. Is it fairly consistent? Yes. We observe this in nature, including our own species. Social behaviour is just another aspect of an animal’s natural behaviour. Yes, I’m fully aware that it can be modified by culture. But again, culture is also a natural phenomenon. Many species of animals exhibit cultural behaviour (where patterns of behaviour are learned within the community and differ between distant communities of the same species).

    Atheists believe our lives do have value. In fact, since we have no reason to think there’s another life after this one, we value our life EVEN MORE. And, having empathy (a natural phenomenon in any social animal), we also place more value on the lives of others, for the same reason.

    It’s true that one day we’ll die and we’ll matter no more (except to those whom we leave behind and our instinct tells us to help them live on; that’s how our genes get left behind). But we are naturally conditioned to attach meanings to our lives, to want to survive, to want to strive for happiness, companionship, love, food, water, shelter etc etc etc. We want to achieve because that’s what makes us feel good. We want to feel good. Just as you want to experience eternal bliss, we like to be happy while we’re here.


    1. Martin,

      It is precisely my point that atheists live as if there are moral values and duties. I am not saying that atheists are immoral people. I am saying that despite that they acknowledge that good and evil cannot exist on their view, they still continue to live as though good and evil exist. This is a distinction known as “moral epistemology” and “moral ontology”. Moral epistemology is how we come to know morals. Moral ontology is the foundation for moral values. You agreed with my point, that on atheism, there is no foundation for them, it is all a matter of relativity with no actual foundation. Despite that, atheists are good people who live as if their moral values are objective.

      I also disagree that Christians believe that the Bible is an ontological source of moral values. It can be treated as a way to come to know morals, however I, and most Christians in my acquaintance, acknowledge that you do not need the Bible to know the difference between right and wrong. In fact, the Bible says that you do not need the Bible to know right from wrong. Romans 2:15 “[Gentiles who do not have the written Law] show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.”

      The question is not how we come to know morals. It is that on atheism, there is no ontological foundation for moral values and duties.

      1. Allocutus


        I wasn’t suggesting that you have indicted atheists with being immoral. My comment addresses the very point you’re making.
        Atheists see moral standards and values as part of their nature, part of their humanity (to various extents influenced by culture). I also agreed that we don’t necessarily see these values as objective (in the sense that a theist would want it; a set of rules imposed from above). And I don’t see any problems with that.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.