So far on this blog, there has been minimal dialog or debate. This is not surprising, for several reasons. First, of course, the blog is new, and readership is not particularly huge (although stats have shown 275 views, which is pretty good!). Second, I have not advertised the site widely, relying primarily on word-of-mouth, and many of the folks that have initially taken a look at the site are also on the atheist side of things. Third, and possibly most importantly, the two main documents I have posted so far consist of (a) a technical discussion of an obscure issue and (b) simple definitions of atheism and agnosticism. In short, I have not yet provided an argument for atheism. My next document is going to take a large step in that direction. I am offering a preview here in order to solicit arguments and counterarguments that I can ensure that I address in that post.
I will be discussing the differences between belief and faith, and will be arguing that faith in anything is both unjustified and unjustifiable; put another way, I will be arguing that faith is not a valid way of knowing reality. Further, I will argue that faith is inherently dangerous to society, and that it is indeed possible to live a life entirely without faith. These last two points together lead directly to the conclusion that anyone interested in intellectual honesty and the betterment of society should root faith out of their own belief system, and should, where appropriate, argue against faith-as-a-way-of-knowing in the broader world. Finally, if the argument holds up to scrutiny, it implies that a discussion of the reasonableness of religious belief should be held on the basis of evidence rather than on the basis of faith. The evidence for or against the reasonableness of religious belief will be in a separate post later.
So, please comment if you have points or arguments that you think would bear on this discussion. Thanks! Also, feel free to advertise this to anyone that you think might have something to contribute to the discussion.