This question makes me wonder just what might be called “atheist qualifications”. I have a degree in Engineering, but considering the documented tendency of engineers to hold extreme conservative or religious views, I’m not sure that I’d recommend it. 8)

The first realistic alternative that sprang to mind was Liberal Arts: not necessarily the way it’s taught in universities today, but according to the original definition as “the education proper to a free person”. Or, as the Wikipedia author puts it: “a curriculum that imparts general knowledge and develops the student’s rational thought and intellectual capabilities”. In my years of school, work and reading before I went to university, I think I can claim that I did receive such an education: to a solid level, but not up to the standards of a Liberal Arts degree.

If I think about the qualifications one might need to contribute here. I think that the other respondents have already covered this adequately: intelligence, ability to form original coherent thoughts, writing ability, patience … and a sense of humour.

Posted: September 28th 2010

See all questions answered by brian thomson

Speaking personally, I got the highest first class degree my university department (a good university at that) had awarded in nearly 30 years, in a subject that demanded strong skills in rational thinking, analysis and argument, as well as a firm grasp of history, philosophy, history of ideas, politics and sociology – all in a foreign language, as it happens.

I have also spent the last 4 years learning as much as I could about science, both through my own reading and university courses.

And, although this isn’t an academic qualification, I used to be a devout Christian who spent 7 years reading everything I could on the subject, from the bible, to apologetics, to theology.

But that’s irrelevant, actually. Asktheatheists, as I understand it, was set up so that people with questions about atheism could ask atheists how they answer them. As you’ll no doubt have spotted, different atheists approach the questions from different perspectives. Much of the time, the answers ARE just our opinion – what else would you expect, from a site set up for the purpose of asking atheists their opinions? Where we present scientific or other factual arguments, I think you’ll find that the vast majority of us reference our statements, so you are able to check them out for yourself.

Since you ask, what proportion of the religious believers you know have degrees in theology?

PS. You might also be interested in this report on recent research by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, which has found that atheists & agnostics have more knowledge about religion than believers have.

Posted: September 28th 2010

See all questions answered by Paula Kirby

We don’t guarantee any minimum level of education, and we don’t pretend that the answers we give are anything more than opinion.

That said, if we make a valid point it is not invalidated just because it wasn’t made by a Ph.D. To imply otherwise is to resort to an ad hominem attack.

Posted: September 28th 2010

See all questions answered by SmartLX

All the participants here write/read well and are able to do research, often linking to other sources from which they got their information. Original synthesis may occur by contributors, based on life experience, research, and facts. The synthesis itself may not stand up to vigorous argument which I would personally find wonderful because then I can learn something new.

If any such conclusion at this site triggers an solid rebuttal, please supply it. Your rebuttal would then be given the same kind of treatment as any other question at this site—I would research it, apply the baloney detection kit, check for logical inconsistencies, etc. Motivated and focused kids can do this. It is not necessary to have academic qualifications in each and every discipline to pull this off excellently.

For involved information that does require an expert specialization in it, that is pointed out that we are unable to go to that level of depth. Most of the topics involving religion/science do not demand that kind of expertise, just a grasp of elementary logic and basic research as in knowing that evolution is a fact and an solidly supported and uncontested scientific theory.

I remember once some nut (he wrote a screaming rant) criticized Wikipedia because mere kids were allowed to contribute! Wikipedia has been shown to be as reliable as most professional works of reference despite the fact that the majority of contributors do not match academic qualifications to the subjects about which they make entries.

Lastly, the possession of academic qualifications does not preclude vigorous debate. Academia is quite a contentious place.

Posted: September 27th 2010

See all questions answered by logicel

You shouldn’t lend credence to what I say because of who I am. You should do so because of the power of my arguments. Do some research, and if my arguments check out, then you should accept them. If not, you should reject them.

Argument from authority is the ultimate basis of religious belief, and I want no part of it. I am happy that there is no Doctor of Mundanity degree.

Posted: September 27th 2010

See all questions answered by Eric_PK

Participants of this site are not selected based on academic qualifications. Visitors who regard such qualifications as an effective guarantee of informed answers, or a guard against the expression of 'mere opinion’, should bear this in mind.

I hope that those visitors who prefer to assess each claim or idea on its own merits, rather than based on the certificates its author may have accumulated, will find useful or interesting material here.

Posted: September 27th 2010

See all questions answered by bitbutter