Deficiencies of Atheism Atheism itself does not aim to disprove the existence of any deity, quite frankly it is better stated as the rejection of the very notion that one might need to do so. It would be absurd to any genuine atheist that they might be asked to disprove that in which they by definition do not believe exists in the first place. It is akin to saying that those who do not believe in the tooth fairy have the aim of disproving the existence of a tooth fairy... rejection of a belief does not infer or confer the responsibility, goal or even desire to disprove said belief.
In the same light... offering solutions is not quite right either. It seems that there is a basic assumption of cohesiveness, a solidified doctrine of the atheist, so to speak. There is not. This is an error made by theists, who strive to compare/contrast and exalt various doctrines within their specific religious affiliation. Theistic existence revolves around the acceptance and internalizarion of doctrine, scripture and sp forth... various unifying elements. Atheism has no such doctrine. It is, simply put, a rejection of deity-centered beliefs and the subsequent ad nauseum doctrine that goes with said beliefs. The existence of an atheist philosopher is not the same as having a guiding belief system that is adopted, or even known, by even a fraction of atheists. It simply isn’t the same. Name an atheist philosopher and then start polling the public, how many atheists can you find that have a) heard of said philosopher and b) know and agree with their tehoretical musing. It won’t result in any unifying principles.
Without any form of representational ideology, beyond simply NOT believing in something, it cannot be said that atheists or atheism offers anything ideological, solution or otherwise. Perhaps it would be better to restate the position and refer to a specific atheist or group.