Arguments against atheism

There are only two significant arguments against atheism, and neither of them is based on any suggestion that religious claims are actually true, just that religion might be useful. They are moral, consquentialist arguments.

The first is what I will call the “the argument from compassion”. This claims that although religious belief is groundless, it is cruel of atheists to deny weaker people delusions on which they depend for their happiness and sense of security. The second is “the argument from inspiration”. This claims that without religion we would not have all the classical art, architecture and indeed the moral deeds which are done in the name of religion. Both of these arguments need dealing with. The former is the stronger, but I’ll come to it second.

As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, artists have to make a living, and when most of this art was commissioned we all know who held the money (and, incidentally, who still holds much of it and receives unjustified tax breaks now). Even up until the middle of this century if you had the sense to be an atheist you had to remain quiet about it or risk unemployment, ostracism and even death. We therefore don’t know if these artists were really even believers at all. Furthermore, a lot of great art is made, and of course many moral deeds are performed, by people of no religious faith.

The first argument is more difficult for any compassionate atheist, and I consider it the most serious argument against outspoken atheism. A lot of people have very miserable lives, and say they can only manage to go on because of their belief that they will end up in some kind of paradise or will see their loved ones again. It does seem cruel to kick away their crutches. We have to consider also the extreme case of how we would feel if we knew a believer had actually killed themselves because we had destoyed their faith.

I think we can still do it. We need to point to two things. First, that their belief in these fictions actually damages the world, because even moderate belief lends credence to the fictions and indirectly encourages extremists. Secondly, there are other things in life from which they should be able to derive consolation. Friendship, love, or simply contemplating justices and beauty that the world does have to offer. These people can by all means imagine wonderful worlds where they will go in some kind of afterlife – call this escapism. But they should not believe – in the complete absence of evidence – that these worlds actually exist. As A.C. Grayling put it, such belief is ignoble. Even in the face of misery and hardship, and in their final hours, it is open to them, as Hume did, to at least refuse to compromise their their sense of dignity and maintain a respect for evidence and truth.