Must atheists believe in evolution?

[RD_151]

Sorry, I just had this thought while posting in the Evolution thread.

what do you guys think, must an atheist believe in Evolution, if not, what could he or she believe in?

What alternative could there be to Evolution and Creation that is plausible?

I'm only noticing that religous people tend to have both options available to them, while atheists are only left with one. Or are there others?



I don't know if this is of interest at all to anyone else, but I just thought I would throw it out there.

 

[unclehobart]

No one is required to believe in anything. It all comes down to familiarity with the material and the ability to apply it in a practical sense.

 

[Luis G]

It's like the big bang theory, there is proof of its existence, but there's also proof of other theories.

Another example is electricity, some believe is an electron flux thru the material, some others believe it is a type of energy flowing from electron to electron. Just a matter of personal choices.

i believe in evolution, not that i have to believe in it, i just do. maybe an atheist thinks it is BS, but i'm sure that the very same atheist will categorize creation as even more BS.

 

[RD_151]

Yes, but assuming one would like to explore the issues of the orgin of life, of the origin of the universe etc etc... ultimately one must choose some form of evolution to explain it. Maybe you are objecting to the word BELIEVE, maybe we should change that.

Must atheists accept the theory of evolution, or is there an alternative?

 

[RD_151]

Yeah, I'm assuming an atheist MUST throw out creationism, since that should be intrinsic in his or her belief system.

However, EVERYONE must ponder such topics at one time or another, and I'm just curious if there is some OTHER option.

 

[Scanty]

no, an athiest doesn't have to accept evolution. They can accept whatever they want. And there is probably an infinite number of explanations for everything. Don't ask me to name them though...

 

[RD_151]

Luis,

I remember you countered the alien theory in the evolution thread by explaining the vicous cycle that starts when you go down that road. However, if you throw out evolution, what is left? Is there anything? So then must we come to an either or type situation where either the universe was "created" or it evolved, and if one is not true, then the other must be.

I started to think about it a little in the last thread. Its like this. Either life originalted spontaneously (through some form of evolution0 or it was created, but there really is no third option, thus, if you defeat one argument, you must accept the other. Does this really work, or is there another option?

 

[unclehobart]

No kidding... then we get into the aliens building the pyramids and all humans are just the children of escaped slave labor and the like. Many kooky theories out there.

 

[RD_151]

yes, but utiimately, it MUST be one or the other, because even assuming "the alien theories" it does't work. Original life MUST come from one or the other, spontaneously, or by creation. Therefore, if you throw out creation, as you must, evolution must be the ONLY option (maybe not exactly the current theory, but some derivative of it).

 

[unclehobart]

A third theory is that this is all just a spotaneous and highly unlikely dream state. Existential philosiphies can BS its way out of any corner.

 

[Luis G]

if we are going to go back to the "creation" time, then i don't know, i just don't accept big bang theorie, i mean, the big explosion EXPLODED something, i don't believe either in God, because well, somebody should have created him.

Maybe my mind is not open enough to accept the "null space" that gives origin to material, i know this has been proved in some labs, but i'm still esceptical about the origins of the universe.

About the originis of life, i don't have that problem, because life was created of existing substances, how was it created?, that's when i buy the evolution theory, a group of substances along with electric reactions gave birth to the most primitive life form, then it grew and blablabla......people find that hard to believe, but we are a bunch of atoms after all.

 

[RD_151]

Yeah, ok, but who's dream state. Wouldn't a dream state imply intelligence and life? Doesn't it leave us with the same problem?

But I wonder if that is still a workable solution, because where did the "life" that is in the dream state come from? I think that would be more creationist, "the mind of God" type arguement. I think (but I could be wrong) that that doesn't work. Maybe it does, but I'm not sure. Remember, we have be assume we are atheists.

 

[Gonz]

Yeah, I'm assuming an atheist MUST throw out creationism, since that should be intrinsic in his or her belief system.

Quite an assumption. As a long time atheist, I have to say I've not discounted the potential of creationism. It is unscientific. It answers things too easily & doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense. Evolution can be seen, today. Evolution can be shown, in progress. Since we have to come from somewhere, evolution makes sense.

Athesim needs to be defined. I think that lack of belief is closer to the point than anti-religion.

 

[RD_151]

Luis,

Yeah, I tend to agree with your arguement about "who created God?" But don't tell LL It definitely causes some controversy with that hypothesis. But thats too far off the subject I guess.

 

[RD_151]

Gonz,

Ok, maybe that was a bad assumption. But my assumptions were as follows.

Being an Atheist, one doen't believe in God, or any Gods.
For creation to occur, there must be a creator.
If there is a creator, who created the creator,
then who created the creators creator... and the vicious circle begins

Thus I assumed that creation couldn't be an option in the absense of some "god-type" being at some level of the chain of events.

Maybe this was a bad assumption, but this is how I came to it.

 

[Gonz]

logical asumption, but assumption nonetheless.

Some see athieism as a religion, of sorts. How can lack of belief in a divine being consider itself religion? I don't practice any dogma. There are no high priets(esses) in lacking belief. There's just nothing after death but becoming worm food. No big deal.

 

[RD_151]

Atheism as a religion, yeah, some see it that way. I guess, in its own way it is kind of. I rather like the rules, I'm surprised there isn't a larger following Sorry, I don't remember the statistics for "people of faith" as AlGore would call them, but its quite staggering, even today.

back to the subject at hand though:

Yep, its was an assumption, but I'm guessing if we could find a poll on it, we would find somewhere north of 99% who don't believe in creationism, but of course, I'm only guessing (I don't have any data or survey to back that assertion up).

 

[Bubba]

a poem:

God is good
God is great
Shut your
face before
he turns you
to clay.

 

[Scanty]

RD_151, have you ever considered that the answer (or other possible explanation) to how life began is beyond our comprehension? It seems like something everyone should automatically consider to me, so excuse me if you have. But from the questions you are asking it seems that you are searching for some definite answer, wherever it may lie. Like - if not this thing, or this thing...then it has to be another thing.

WHY does it have to be so clear? You are only thinking with the tools of your own awareness and what has been brought into your attention by the world we know - consider the infinite amount of knowledge that humans don't have access to.

Of course there could be other explanations. You don't have to identify them. Just accept the possiblity.

 

[Jeslek]

*sits back and relaxes, watching all the atheists fuck with each other's minds*