A certain Elaine Cristina, self-identified as “Former Learning Advisor,” replied to the Quora site question Can atheists logically defend atheism? thusly:
Atheism is all about logic, being rational and asking for proofs. The majority of atheists have no interest in “defending atheism”, which is exactly the opposite of the religious folks.
Let us dissect this learning advisor’s advice:
“Atheism is all about logic, being rational”: on Atheism this means that Atheism is all about adhering to byproducts of accidents as emotively subjective personal preference du jour.
That’s because on Atheism logic, for example, is just an accidental aspect of the accidental universe and there’s no universal imperative to adhere to it so logical fallacies don’t matter.
As for, “asking for proofs” well, the very first step in systematic critical thinking is for the Atheist to justify asking for proof (not evidence?) on their worldview.
My experience, of having noted as much to literally hundreds of Atheists, is that they are literally incapable of taking that first step, and 99% don’t even make an attempt but just say words to the effect of, “Gimme proof ’cause thus saith I.”
I would like to see a citation to the study which resulted in the conclusion that, “The majority of atheists have no interest in ‘defending atheism.’”
Yet, I have no problem believing that since try and try and try as I might with hundreds of them, I can verify that it’s not only that they have interest but that they are literally incapable.
Now, jumping from, “atheists have no interest” to, “the opposite of the religious folks” is an interesting admission: religious folks seek to defend their views, Atheists don’t—very well then, I’ll go with that.
But note that apparent implication that something is wrong with, “the opposite of the religious folks” but she neglected to note THE most important point: what, on her worldview, is wrong with “religious folks” doing something that is, “the opposite” of that which Atheist do—or don’t do? So much for logic and reason.
Now, she followed that rant with embarrassingly childishly incoherent memes so let’s review those:
That one seems to depict Atheists lining up to adore their consoling delusions.
That one a merely jumped to conclusion of a mere assertion based on mere hidden assumptions. Any logical thinker would note as much rather than parroting it uncritically.
I did think about it and don’t need much time: this is simply 1,001% inaccurate, “Adam…had other sons and daughters” (Gen 5:4).
Another merely jumped to mere assertion of a positive affirmation based on mere hidden assumptions. But it seems to imply a view whereby it’s ridiculous to believe that we came from Adam, Eve, and their three sons only but came from the byproducts of a very long series of happy accidents to include life from non-life.
If there’s clarity in it, the has failed to elucidate any of it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.