If we need to be labeled, we are atheists. However, this site is not dedicated to atheism as such. Our attitude to the world around us and our interaction with it are not defined by the words "I believe" - "I don't believe" in God. Rather, these are combinations of the words "I know" - "I don't know" and "I think" - "I don't think". In general, being in any group of people has negative consequences even if this group can be characterized as positive. Belonging to atheists automatically gives grounds for believers to declare that we are, they say, just another religion with other gods and objects of worship. Our god is knowledge and technical progress, and we pray to dedication, well, or something like that.
Another problem with atheism is that it does not deny faith as such, but only faith in the supernatural. The need to believe in something is associated with the danger of ending up in the ranks of nihilists, who are not considered very good company.
But we do not believe in principle, and not only in the existence of God, but also in all other things that require such an attitude. Absolutely all phenomena of the surrounding world can be understood and explained, and if there is something that we are not yet able to explain, this does not mean that this phenomenon has a divine origin, but only that we have not yet accumulated enough knowledge. Science deals with this, but you do not need to believe in it, because science itself is built on doubt and is always in the process of proving its rightness. If it is wrong, then it admits it, because making mistakes is an integral part of science.
There is no point in arguing with believers about whether God exists or not, and if He does, why He doesn’t finally make peace on earth and make everyone happy. People believe in God not because there is some urgent need for it, but almost exclusively because they are born into families of believers, and absorb this faith, as they say, with their mother’s milk. At the same time, their faith is always strictly the same as that of their parents. Islamists are not born to Protestants, just as Catholics are not born to Buddhists. There are exceptions, but they are isolated. The same rule applies here as for any other group of people: your own group always seems better than someone else’s. If, due to circumstances, you suddenly find yourself in another group, then this other group now becomes “your own,” and your former one is someone else’s. Primitive, but what can you do, that’s how we are made.
Arguing about the existence of gods is like arguing about the existence of deep-sea guinea pigs or space elephants. No one has ever seen either one or the other. However, the existence of, say, space elephants seems more likely due to the fact that we can at least somehow imagine elephants, but in the case of gods, it is completely unclear what exactly is being discussed. God is not directly characterized in the Bible. All that is known about him is that he prefers Jews to other people, hates Marduk with a passion, and has a weakness for the aroma of fried meat. Who is he, what is he, how is he made, where did he come from and why are questions that, for even asking them, would at least result in immediate burning at the stake. The absolute uncertainty of God from the point of view of common sense creates insurmountable semantic problems in discussing issues related to him. The word "existence" itself comes from the word essence, but in the case of God, his essence is so vague that the question of what exactly can or cannot exist loses its practical meaning.
In this context, it remains unclear what exactly people believe in. Is it a belief in a miracle, hope for an afterlife, or simply a need to follow traditions? It happens that people convert to faith under the impression of great shocks. For example, after a happy recovery from a seemingly incurable disease or having survived a serious accident. Here, the lack of critical thinking comes into play, because luck is not a message from heaven, but just a matter of statistical probability, which can always be assessed and calculated. Whatever happens to you during your life, at each specific moment, depending on what you are doing at that moment, there is a certain probability of one or another development of events. For example, the probability of a mountain climber falling and getting hurt is much higher than for an aquarium fish lover, however, the risk of this happening only increases when the climber is climbing a mountain. Statistics tell us that of any given number of climbers, a certain percentage will definitely fall into the abyss if they are given enough time to climb mountains. Of course, you can complicate the task and introduce a coefficient of sinfulness of climbers and track how it affects their death rate, but most likely there will be no deviations from the average. By the way, an aquarium fish lover, in turn, always has a chance of drowning in an aquarium if this aquarium is deep enough.
So, faith is a conviction in the reality of something whose existence cannot be proven. This seems silly to us, and instead of the word "faith" we use the word "confidence". Confidence, or rather its level, is determined by the amount of available information. The more information there is, the stronger the confidence. As a result, confidence can develop into conviction and even become a fact. Again, everything depends on the amount of information.
Richard Dawkins once told a story about an argument he got into during one of his plane trips. The argument was about the coexistence of people and dinosaurs, the impossibility of which Richard defended. His opponent could not understand what the problem was. To Dawkins' remark "but they died out 60,000 years ago!", he objected: "What makes you think that they all died out? Maybe they still exist somewhere where they are very difficult to see, for example, in the jungle!" This funny episode is actually a clear example of the lack of critical thinking that many, if not all, religious people are guilty of.
One of the stumbling blocks in disputes with believers is the origin of life. The version about a divine designer is defended by citing examples of very complex systems. For example, eyes. This argument is based on the impossibility of imagining how such an incredibly complex object as an eye could have arisen on its own, through some kind of mutations and natural selection. The ridiculousness of such a position is not even in the lack of knowledge and imagination, but in the illogicality of the very formulation of the question. A religious person, for some incredible reason, believes that the instantaneous creation of an eye on one of the seven days of creation by some unknowable, but omnipresent and all-seeing being is more likely than its gradual development and complication over millions of years of evolution in accordance with the laws of physics and chemistry.
Another controversial issue is the rejection by believers of the version of man's origin from apes. In fact, such a version does not exist, and science does not claim that man descended from apes, but only modestly insists that man is a monkey, only a very self-confident one, and that he shares a common ancestor with other species of monkeys.
The reason why religious people believe in miracles is also unclear. After all, no one has ever witnessed a single miracle. A miracle, by definition, is the accomplishment of something impossible, and precisely because of its impossibility, it never happens, and if it does happen, it means that it was not impossible and, accordingly, it is not a miracle.
However, let's return to our site and its goals. Yes, we do not participate in the atheist movement, just as we do not participate in any other movement. Our task is to show the lack of common sense in many human endeavors, be it wars, politics or religion itself, and we fight mainly against stupidity.
If you are interested in this approach to life - welcome! Please send an email to the admin and we will contact you. We apologize in advance for the complexity of the registration procedure, but such is the nature of the issues we touch on: the risk of getting another ROC-GB-shnik or, excuse me, just an idiot is very high, so additional questions cannot be avoided.