Most every atheist, with the courage to share his or her views, has at one time or another been told, by a person of faith, that atheism is simply another religion, and requires just as much faith as any other. Some will argue that we can’t possibly know that there is no god. We take it on faith. Scientists can’t answer every question, and for those that they can, we put our faith in their conclusions.
There is a term for the logical fallacy presented here; it’s called an argument from authority. To make an argument from authority, you begin with the premise that a person or group of persons is in a position of such authority that their claims are above reproach. Arguments from authority are common in politics, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.” In the school yard, “Because the teacher said so”, and in religion, “. . . by action of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error”
The flaw in arguments from authority is that authority in itself is not proof. It is perfectly possible that an authoritative claim is true, but it is not necessarily true by virtue of its authority. We know for a fact that the authoritative claims leading up to the invasion of Iraq were false. We also know that the Christian church has made many authoritative claims throughout history that have later been proven false. An argument from authority must be accompanied by corroborating proofs to be considered compelling.
We can easily establish that religion is almost entirely an argument from authority. Christians believe that the Bible is the holy word of God. Why do they believe this? Because they have been told it is so, by the Bible no less. They accept as bedrock truth that Jesus is the son of God incarnate and having died on the cross, he rose from the dead and ascended bodily into Heaven. They believe these things because the Bible states them, and they have accepted the Bible as an authoritative source on its own merit.
Another name for an argument from authority is faith. What exactly is faith? According to dictionary.com, Faith is defined as:
- Confidence or trust in a person or thing
- Belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion
- Belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc
Confidence or trust in a person or thing is a textbook example of an argument from authority. It describes exactly what religious people do when they turn to the Bible, or the clergy for answers or guidance. It is precisely what the faithful do when they listen to a sermon.
The second definition, a belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religions, is self evident. It describes faith as the very essence of religiosity.
Without a doubt, religions all have a code of ethics, called morality, and a standard of merit. You must live up to this standard in order to receive your rewards in the afterlife.
The question we need to answer is; are atheists guilty of relying on arguments from authority, and do those arguments form the foundation of our world view? Are atheists relying on faith?
Let’s start with our first definition. Do atheists place their confidence or trust in persons or things? Without a doubt, we do. We have great confidence in the academic community, and the results they produce. Without the trust we place in experts, there would be very little we could know about our world.
What about belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion? Let’s change the pronouns for the sake of fairness, and rephrase this as; a belief in someone or in the doctrines or teaching of an organization. Well, this could be applied to atheists, couldn’t it? After all, we place great stock in scientists, and what they have to say about the natural world.
As for the third definition, atheists do hold to a code of ethics. These ethics are normally based on naturalistic values, and they can vary from one person to another. But I think it’s fair to say that all atheists have a personal code of ethics they aspire to follow. A standard of merit could describe the scientific process. There is a clear standard that must be met in order to be considered valuable.
Another aspect of faith is a faith in natural processes. We have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow and that when we walk out our front doors, gravity will keep us from floating off into space. We have no way of knowing with absolute certainty that these things will hold true from one second to the next, but we behave as if they will. We put our faith in these constancies.
We come now to the core question; do these acts of faith constitute an argument from authority, and therefore, a logical fallacy? There is a distinct difference between the forms of faith practiced by atheists and the religious.
Christians, Jews, and Muslims all elevate the act of faith to a virtue. To believe in God on the authority of the claims made on his behalf is a holy act that will be rewarded at a later date. Faith is one thing all three creeds agree is required for salvation. You must accept these claims to be true without evidence, or face eternal punishment.
Atheists use faith as one more tool in their arsenal. We demand proof where it can be had, and we scrutinize any claim for validity. In order for a scientific claim to have merit, it must be reproducible, and capable of making predictions that can be verified. Even then, these claims must stand up to constant challenge. Faith is essential because there is no absolute certainty. We have no way of knowing that our senses are representing the world with 100% accuracy.
A theist’s faith is a dogmatic thing, based on claims of revealed truths that are beyond reproach. Their world view is static, and when information comes along to challenge that view, the information itself must be modified, or dismissed altogether. Their world model becomes a contorted pretzel of logical fallacies and deliberate distortions of fact.
An atheist’s faith is based on observation and corroboration. Our faith in the natural world is a malleable thing. It is composed of a constantly growing catalog of information. As new information calls old assumptions into question, they are modified or abandoned. We are atheists because we require that anything we learn fit our world model. If it does not, either the information or the model is flawed, and must be reassessed.
To describe atheism as a religion is a semantic trick that does not hold up to critical scrutiny. Atheism, as the name implies, is a lack of theism. It is a rejection of revealed truths, and a denial of dogma.
exquisitetruth