I have to disagree with the conclusion of this post, that asking “why” is the wrong question. The issue I have is that the argument assumes its own conclusion: God doesn’t exist therefore asking why we are here is nonsensical.
If we simply re-frame the wording of the question I believe the problem will become apparent. Let us assume that to ask “why”, is to ask for what purpose is X. If we ask “why do humans exist in the world”, we presuppose not the existence of a creator, but merely the possibility of one.
The atheist answer to this question therefore would be akin to “there was no purpose since there was no sentient force involved in creation”.
The crucial difference here is that one rejects the premise of the existence of God in order to draw the conclusion that there is no ultimate purpose to our existence, rather than using the premise of a lack of purpose to deny the existence of God.
As atheists we can still pose coherent questions of the why form. For example, if we perhaps ask why we as individuals exist, we might conclude that our parents conceived us with the purpose of providing them joy and fulfillment.
