<p>"Let me get straight to the point. Atheism is an abstract concept, and therefore the question of whether it exists or not is irrelevant. You and I have been discussing it, so therefore it MUST exist."</p>
<p>Let me remind you of your initial comment: "I don't think Atheism exists."</p>
<p>"But why do so many human beings believe that then? It's not because they are stupid, or they've been "forced" to believe in it, as you would argue. It's because I believe humans are naturally inclined to believe in something beyond reason. I accept Evolution and atheism as the "correct," if you will, way; but I also accept that religion and spirituality is impossible to avoid. To some extent, I believe all humans harbor a spiritual side, something that allows them to give purpose to life."</p>
<p>No it's partly because of miseducation. And to quote Dawkins, "Fundamentalist religion is hell-bent on ruining the scientific education of countless thousands of innocent, well-meaning, eager young minds. Non-fundamentalist, 'sensible' religion may not be doing that. But it is making the world safe for fundamentalism by teaching children, from their earliest years, that unquestioning faith is a virtue."</p>
<p>Darwin considered himself an agnostic. It's his theory, but it's been advanced a lot since his death.</p>
<p>"Sam Harris practices a form of Buddhism. Ironic? I think not."</p>
<p>Religions such as Buddhism and Confucianism should be treated "not as religions at all but as ethical systems or philosophies of life." Harris has some interesting views, too.</p>
<p>"Thank you for the statistics. However, I really do not understand how they relate to this discussion except to describe the religiousity of a nation. In fact, that might attest to man's natural inclination toward religion."</p>
<p>If you had read through the article from National Geographic, you would know that America is FAR more religious than Europe. Just look at the statistics:</p>
<p>"In my concluding statement I'd like to point out that this argument is inherently flawed. Why? Because you, and I, and Sam Harris and Dawkins are human beings. Therefore, it's impossible to produce a convincing argument for either side. Perhaps human beings do not even know HOW to comprehend life, it is beyond our capacity to ever understand."</p>
<p>Science is relatively new. We obviously don't know everything, but we have learned a lot. Who knows what the capabilities of our brains are in understanding science. But our brains can evolve, too, can't they? Agnosticism, like irreducible complexity, cannot be objectively viewed in any other way than a surrender to ignorance. To surrender to ignorance and call it God (or too complex to understand even) has always been premature, and it remains premature today.</p>
<p>Oh, and evolution creates the ability to think. That is what led to religion and superstition. Evolution itself does not create god or belief in god.</p>