Philosophical Vegan Forum

the title says it all, how do you prove that Atheism is the most logical belief system?

Something is either logical (internally consistent/consistent with logical truths like the law of non-contradiction) or it is not.
There aren't exactly beliefs that are more or less logical along a spectrum.

Most theistic beliefs are illogical, because they involve logical contradictions. This may not be the case in all theistic beliefs. However, just because something does not involve an obvious logical contradiction doesn't mean it is empirically true.

What you may be looking for is proof that Atheism is the most rational belief system; and for that, you need look no further than Occam's razor and basic science (physics, biology, etc.) Here, if we start with the premise that you want to believe things that are most likely to be true, then there is no reason to believe there is a god, and that's all the reason you need to not assume one exists (implicit atheism). Adding any assumption to a system increases the chance of error. Keep it simple. If there's ever evidence for a god, then and only then should the assumption be made to account for that evidence.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." -Winston Churchill

Maybe the best argument for atheism is the way theists wrap themselves in logical knots trying to make what little they have sound logical. One has only to listen to a guy like William Lane Craig to realise that his Kalam Cosmological argument is a empty as it can be in its failure to show there is any sort of god - though Lane Craig pulls his own god out of it like a conjurer pulls a rabbit out of a hat!

I think it will be difficult to argue that one belief system is more logical than the other. This because the belief systems are so huge. It is hard to argue about atheism as a whole being logical, because there are many forms of atheism which are not logical at all (imo). (This is btw no argument against your definition of atheism, I am trying to say that atheism as a whole is pretty huge.)

And ofc the same holds for theism, there are many non-logical believes (pretty sure much more than non-logical atheistic views), but I would suggest that there are also logical theistic views. So it is difficult to say that theism is logical on its own.

I would argue that you first need to give a definition of the believe systems you are talking about, before you could say something about their 'logical'-value.

Atheism to me is one of the silliest notions around. The big problem with organized religion, is the fact it is organized- and that these folks are calling themselves this and calling others that. So what have athiests done? They've organized themselves and given themselves the title of atheist! They have essentially created another religion. There are even atheist churches now...

It's just another term to divide people which is the problem with religion all along....

Mr. 95/5 wrote:Atheism to me is one of the silliest notions around. The big problem with organized religion, is the fact it is organized- and that these folks are calling themselves this and calling others that. So what have athiests done? They've organized themselves and given themselves the title of atheist! They have essentially created another religion. There are even atheist churches now...

It's just another term to divide people which is the problem with religion all along....

Not sure if you're serious or not. Is what you're saying true with reality?

I think Mr. 95/5 is just confusing what atheism is and what it isn't.
As a word, some people argue it's silly, like having a word for people who don't believe in unicorns: why define people by what they aren't?

Atheism isn't a unified belief system, it's only the lack of theism. Much like amorality is not a moral system, or being apolitical doesn't mean you're a member of the apolitical party.

It may seem silly to define somebody by what he or she is not, but because most people are that thing of one stripe or another, it's often useful.

Atheists haven't really organized themselves. There are groups who have, like secular humanists, who happen to be [mostly] atheists, but they aren't organized around atheism. Likewise, anti-theists can organize themselves, but again, that's not atheism: that's being organized under a hostility to theism and being against it, which isn't what atheism is about. Atheism proper is only about not being a theist, whatever else you may be instead -- it says almost nothing about a person, and it's not something to rally around.