One of the strongest arguments used to show that radical or militant atheism (as opposed to mere lack of belief) may be philosophically unfounded is the argument from moral and rational foundations—especially when it comes to objective morality, logic, and human dignity.
Here’s a key philosophical critique:
🧠 The Argument from Moral and Rational Incoherence
Premise 1: Radical atheism asserts that everything—including morality, reason, and consciousness—arises from blind, purposeless material processes (naturalism).
Premise 2: But reason, logic, and objective moral values cannot be grounded in pure matter, chance, or survival mechanisms.
Conclusion: Therefore, radical atheism undercuts its own foundations by denying the very principles (reason and morality) it must use to argue its case.
🔍 Explained:
- Reason: If the human mind is just a byproduct of random evolution, why trust it to produce truth rather than just survival behavior?
- C.S. Lewis: “If minds are wholly dependent on brains, and brains on biochemistry, and biochemistry (in the long run) on the meaningless flux of atoms, I cannot understand how the thought of those minds should have any more significance than the sound of the wind in the trees.”
- Morality: Most radical atheists believe in things like human rights, justice, and evil. But in a godless, material-only universe, why would anything be objectively good or evil?
- Personhood: If humans are just evolved animals or chemical machines, what basis is there for free will, personal responsibility, or dignity?
🔄 Self-Undermining Worldview
If radical atheism denies the existence of objective truth, free will, moral law, or purpose, then it undercuts:
- The trustworthiness of reason (which it uses to make its arguments),
- The value of humans (which it assumes in its ethical positions),
- And the reality of good and evil (which it often uses to critique religion).
This results in intellectual incoherence—the worldview collapses under its own assumptions.
Summary:
The best argument against radical atheism is that it depends on values it cannot justify—such as reason, morality, and meaning—thus making it philosophically self-defeating.
Is it possible your atheism is just a father issue?
If your position is just that you lack a belief then you position is all in your head it has no relevance outside of your head. Is your lack of belief just a mental Fart?
John Keefe
Article URL : https://breakingnewsandreligion.online/discuss/