Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Theists for some reason feel the need to pretend that a lack of belief, or a belief in the non existence of something is a system of belief analogous to the positive belief systems of theists . It isn't, and atheists make this distinction.
It is a semantic trick and a deliberate mischaracterization. It matters because theists are twisting the actual situation into something they can more readily deal with ... the notion that we are a competing belief leads to the notion that we are a competing faith or religion and then we can not only be dispensed with as simply as any other competing ideology they declare "wrong", we don't threaten the core of their faith-based ideology by deconstructing its very basis. What we are doing is breaking the vicious circle of asserted "Truth" and asserted "untruth". Everything in theism is simply declared right or wrong by fiat and without an evidentiary basis. Everything about atheism is requiring an evidential basis before those judgments can be accepted as valid.
This point matters because faith is a failed epistemology that does not lead toward truth. We are opposed to faith (belief without evidence) and we do not accept the burden of proof. We are not making the positive claim that god is disproven. We are rejecting the positive claim that he exists -- a claim based on things like empty assertion, appeals to authority, argument from incredulity, argument from personal subjective experience -- anything that is a logical fallacy will suffice.
Are you asking for a percentage or just from highly unlikely to very likely?
For me I would say highly unlikely but not impossible. Theists never seem to answer if they think there is a possibility of there being no gods or if a god exist it is not their god.
I don't believe I can meaningfully assign a probability to that idea in general. Every single conception of 'God' is likely to be different. I will say that I think the conceptions of God that would be most likely to exist are those which contain no internal logical contradiction, are not predicated on semantic games, and are not contradicted by physical evidence. Unfortunately those definitions are generally ones that are utterly untestable, and thus unquantifiable. There is simply no way to meaningfully assign a probability. And since a logically contradictory 'God' or one directly contradicted by our observable reality would necessarily be less likely than one not displaying these flaws, unknown and unknowable is the best probability estimate I can make.
Which is why I don't believe. If the most likely definitions appear to be the ones that are unfalsifiable or irrelevant, then until better logical and evidentiary support is available I feel very justified in withholding a positive belief in the existence of God.
I would ask the opposite question. Why do atheists feel the need to deny that they have any belief?
Thousands of years (and counting) with zero evidence is typically among the foremost of reasons. In practice, belief in the supernatural is even less logical than believing hallucinations are real, as a person hallucinating at least has the benefit of scientific explanation for their misconception.
The biggest problem for the religious is that they profess to have a definitive answer before ever asking the question. Such is an inherently dangerous and long-outmoded proposition.
So you believe it is unlikely that God exists. That is a belief.
50/50 would be the a priori probability
Word games get boring very quickly. Based on the evidence I think it is highly unlikely that a god exists. If you want to call that a belief system there is nothing I can do to stop you, but I can recognize that you are just playing a word game. I also based on evidence recognize that if I place my finger in the door jam of my car and slam it shut it is going to hurt and also that if I turn on the light switch in my kitchen it will not cause water to fill up the bath tub upstairs. If you wish to call those belief systems you can but that doesn't mean others will agree with you.
Going to answer my question or are you above doing that?
So you believe it is unlikely that God exists. That is a belief.
50/50 would be the a priori probability
It is a belief about the liklihood of God, which is different than a belief about His existence. Just as I can believe that a fair coin flip can be approximated by a 50/50 probability, I can choose not to believe someone's assertion that it is "heads" without having to believe that it is "tails".
Belief about a specific outcome is independent of beliefs about probability. No one gets to call "50/50" during a coin flip at the Super Bowl.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 
