Atheism Is Not Just A Subset of Skepticism

On my Facebook wall, Andy Tuck asked me the following, in reply to my post last week about the importance of atheism to skepticism:

Can we simply view “atheism” as a subset of “skepticism” and leave it at that? It can be viewed as a peculiar form of skepticism about very particular truth-claims. (I am, of course, not focusing on strong forms of atheism that assert truth claims about the “non-existence of God” — I don’t even know what that means. I have enough trouble with metaphysical God-claims to try to deal with proofs for non-existence.

I would say no, that atheism is not just a subset of skepticism.

The reason for that is that skepticism is in one respect a methodology and atheism can be arrived at by different methodologies than skepticism. Skepticism as a deliberate methodology rules out knowledge claims about certain kinds of things in principle—whether this means ruling out that which cannot be directly observed (in which case you get extreme Humean skepticism which even doubts necessary causation) or ruling out anything that cannot be verified scientifically (as many modern, scientistic skeptics do).

Atheism could be arrived at metaphysically. One could be open to the god hypothesis in principle (even if it is not, say, a scientific hypothesis) and simply think that the metaphysical evidence is wanting or that a non-theist explanation is superior to a theist one. In the latter case, the alternative hypotheses to theism might even equally speculative in kind as theism but just have better arguments in its favor.

Those atheists exist, they are relevant and should not be definitionally excluded.

Alternatively, we may define skepticism more modestly as a hesitancy to affirm, rather than a flat out denial of all beliefs which do not meet some particular criterion. So the modest skeptic might say, “I do not say that there are no ghosts, only that I cannot affirm that there are ghosts or affirm that any known evidence implies that there likely are, but they still might exist.” Atheism may legitimately take the form of a resistance to affirm the existence of gods and be a default “lack of belief” atheism. But some of us are not merely skeptical and unwilling to affirm that there are gods but actually think we can affirm with reasonable enough confidence for a knowledge claim that there are no gods. Who is merely “skeptical” that there really is an Aquaman or a Zeus? No one I know. Everyone I know is damn near certain about it. Well, I am the same way about Yahweh and Jesus and Allah and all other personal gods. I see no difference between any of them and Aquaman and Zeus. I am not merely skeptical and unwilling to affirm belief in them.  I affirm that they do not exist.

Your Thoughts?

Drunken Mall Santa
The Collar That Choked Open Hearts
Alix Jules On Being An African American Humanist
Why Would Being Controlled By A Brain Be Any Less Free Than Being Controlled By An Immaterial Soul?
About Daniel Fincke

Dr. Daniel Fincke  has his PhD in philosophy from Fordham University and spent 11 years teaching in college classrooms. He wrote his dissertation on Ethics and the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. On Camels With Hammers, the careful philosophy blog he writes for a popular audience, Dan argues for atheism and develops a humanistic ethical theory he calls “Empowerment Ethics”. Dan also teaches affordable, non-matriculated, video-conferencing philosophy classes on ethics, Nietzsche, historical philosophy, and philosophy for atheists that anyone around the world can sign up for. (You can learn more about Dan’s online classes here.) Dan is an APPA  (American Philosophical Practitioners Association) certified philosophical counselor who offers philosophical advice services to help people work through the philosophical aspects of their practical problems or to work out their views on philosophical issues. (You can read examples of Dan’s advice here.) Through his blogging, his online teaching, and his philosophical advice services each, Dan specializes in helping people who have recently left a religious tradition work out their constructive answers to questions of ethics, metaphysics, the meaning of life, etc. as part of their process of radical worldview change.

  • Jason Thibeault

    There’s a subset of atheists that exist in an overlapping part of the atheist/skeptic Venn diagram, but you can come to atheism through skepticism, you can come to skepticism through atheism (like me), and you can come to either state from completely unrelated paths.

  • stevarious

    One of my coworkers is an atheist.

    He also believes that life on earth was seeded by aliens, and that they are responsible for the pyramids, and that they sometimes visit earth nowadays to perform experiments on people.

    He also thinks that the moon landing was faked and that Fox News is the most trustworthy source of news in the world.

    Suffice to say there isn’t a skeptical bone in his body.

  • lordshipmayhem

    My path to atheism started with the scientific method. I thought (and still think) that as a process, this was the best way of arriving at the truth – you’d never actually get to 100% of the truth, but the more times you redid the scientific process, the closer you’d inevitably get.

    It was this, the realization that (in all probability) there was no supernatural power, that led me to the realization that all those gods we worshipped, all of them, were probably just our own creation.

    Welcome to freethoughtblogs. I look forward to reading more.