Sir, – Olan McGowan (May 7th), responding to the article by Joe Humphreys on Richard Kearney (Arts & Ideas, "How Atheists Can Still Believe in God", May 2nd), writes that we need to embrace the simplicity of atheism.
May I ask what is simple about a position which asserts that, due to lack of evidence, we must conclude that God does not exist, while also asserting that no evidence can be provided for God’s non-existence? One cannot “prove a negative”, as they say, but it might just be that the non-existence of God is as significant for human consciousness as His existence. This is a quandary that the atheist position cannot resolve, despite the best efforts of its intellectual heavyweights, and why we need philosophers such as Richard Kearney. – Yours, etc,
AIDAN TYNAN,
Clare Street,
Riverside,
Cardiff.