Is Atheism a Religious Belief?

Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Is Atheism a Religious Belief?

 

Yes, I know, I know.

But after arguing with brother for a long time and having him endlessly insist this was so, I have to bring it here for deconstruction.

Like most of you, I think atheism is a lack of belief in god, period. There's no further religious content to it whatsoever.

But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics, involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

To me such a statement is ludicrous. The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering - tho' brother's argument suggests immaterial metaphysics - including human comprehension - owns not just thought but perceived reality itself. Such an assertion has no basis in my opinion.

What do others think?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Posts: 7580
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:But

Atheistextremist wrote:

But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics, involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

So if you find one atheist that is not well versed in metaphysics, doesn't care about the origin of the universe, and is not interested in the sciences... will your brother admit he's wrong?  I know many atheists that are just as I described.

Please donate to one of these highly rated charities to help impede the GOP attack on America 2017-2019.

Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Come on - you know religion

Come on - you know religion involves ritual - and what ritual does an atheist have except those they choose for themselves?

As for wondering about the whichness of the why - throw it all on the fire. 

 

Atheistextremist wrote:

But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics, involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."


 

Under this definition, every human thought is religious.  A little over board, don't you think?

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Of course it is not a

Of course it is not a religion.  I grew up in a majority atheistic society, and I can tell you for a fact that an extremely small majority resembled the atheists on this forum.  People as a whole find other irrational 'world views' to hold in order to fill the void religion makes.  I think your brother is thinking of an idealized atheistic position where one applies critical thinking to every aspect of one's life... which still doesn't make it a religion. 

Ask him to define religion and go from there, you can break down his argument by showing him the definition is wrong. 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:Like

Atheistextremist wrote:

Like most of you, I think atheism is a lack of belief in god, period. There's no further religious content to it whatsoever.

But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics, involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

To me such a statement is ludicrous. The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering. Such an assertion has no basis.

What do others think?

It's pure equivocation to say that metaphysics and religion are one and the same... that's simply not true.

Atheism is a position about belief in god, so it entails some statement about religion. But to call it a religion or religious is a stretch. Atheism itself entails nothing about what one believes about metaphysics or anything for that matter. It's merely a statement about one's belief in god....

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1970
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote: Yes,

Atheistextremist wrote:
Yes, I know, I know.

But after arguing with brother for a long time and having him endlessly insist this was so, I have to bring it here for deconstruction.

Lol, ya, it's crazy that you have to pull their heads far enough out of their asses just so they can teach them the basics of 'polarity'.

First of all, their 'premise' is a false premise to begin with.

In their minds there are only 2 positions on any given topic. Either 'for', or 'against'.

When of course, in reality, there is a 3rd.

Neutral.

Because atheism is the 'default' position, anyone who 'deviates' from atheism, is the 'deviant'.

Not the other way around...

But, to their 'mentality', if someone is not 'for' their dogma, that someone is 'against' their dogma.

Because they are 'militant', 'anti social' and 'unsociable' towards any heresy, any 'dissent' incites an extreme 'fight or flight' response, because to them, it's their 'core'.

Fundamentally, Christians (IME) are every bit as emotionally out of control towards heretics, as Muslims are towards heretics (apostates). The only real difference of course, is simply the level of action that militant Muslims are mostly willing to engage in.

Atheistextremist wrote:
Like most of you, I think atheism is a lack of belief in god, period. There's no further religious content to it whatsoever.

There is no 'religious' content even among the most vocal anti-religious individual(s).

Just as being 'apolitical' is not a different party, being 'anti religious' is not a different 'religion'.

Saying that an 'anti-religion' is a 'different' religion clearly demonstrates just how completely dishonest, desperate, delusional, undiplomatic and irrational they are.

Atheistextremist wrote:
The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering. Such an assertion has no basis.

What do others think?

The bottom line is that they are 'supernaturalists'.

Anyone who 'only' deals with 'natural' things, only 'accepts' that which is 'natural'.

So, anyone who only adheres to natural phenomena; they consider 'naturalists'. Because skeptics/atheists won't 'deviate' from natural, to 'include' the 'supernatural', they'll stick the 'dogma' label on 'naturalists' as ones who cannot divorce themselves from their 'naturalistic' worldview.

Which is just a retarded way to view individuals who don't 'deviate' from reality.

The real hardcore 'believers' and 'adherents' are just looking for a reason to justify their extreme hatred and extreme bigotry, which is at the 'core' of all these beliefs.

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Gawdzilla
atheist
Posts: 69
Joined: 2011-01-01
User is offlineOffline
I used to say I wasn't

I used to say I wasn't religious enough to consider myself an atheist. That took too long to type, however, so I just say atheist now because there's no word I like to express my utter lack of interested in or need for religion.


Thunderios
atheist
Posts: 261
Joined: 2010-12-26
User is offlineOffline
Isn't that the same one as

Isn't that the same one as the evolution is a religion thing? It answers the four questions: where are we, Who am I, what is our purpose, what do I do? with, in a law-governed universe, a bunch of particles, reproduce and reproduce. Supposedly.
Of course, atheism doesn't say one thing about morals and values, so in that way it's not religion. It's not even a world view. Humanism is a worldview, atheism isn't.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
I was going to point out

I was going to point out what Sapient said though...atheism *doesn't* include any concepts past disbelief in deity.  I know many atheists who are not rational, skeptical physicalists.  We have a couple on this board.  Under his definition rational, skeptical physicalists *would* qualify as a religion though.  That dilutes the concept of religion to simply mean 'any philosophical concept'.  That's fine, I guess, but why would anyone want to do such a thing?  To do so makes the word, 'religion' useless in conversation.

 

 

I think it is interesting he feels such a strong need to shoe-horn atheism into religion though.  Have you asked him to explain what utility he thinks is served?  Perhaps you can ask if there is any world-view that is not religious under his definition.  If he says yes, then I'd be interested to know what that is and see an example of someone following it.  If he says no, then what's the point of having the word religion?

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 Now if only we could get

 Now if only we could get the IRS to accept such a broad definition of religion, I could declare my corporation a religious organization and get a tax break 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Now if

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Now if only we could get the IRS to accept such a broad definition of religion, I could declare my corporation a religious organization and get a tax break 

Leave it to beyond to see the entrepreneurial interpretations, Smiling If I had tax exemptions I would declare atheism a religion.  

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15751
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Now if

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Now if only we could get the IRS to accept such a broad definition of religion, I could declare my corporation a religious organization and get a tax break 

What makes you think it isn't a religion already? We live in a two party system paid off by the dogmatism of "no rules".

The Supreme Court has ruled that a company can be treated like an individual. And what happens when ANYTHING gets big enough, and has money? Abuse of power, just like the god of the bible.

China's Communist party wouldn't have power if they didn't have money. Saudi Arabia wouldn't have money if it didn't sell oil.

You think our Constitution will always protect freedom? It wont as long as those with money insist on no oversight and have the money to strip the checks and balances set up by our founders to prevent ANY monopoly of power.

Your problem is that you think that speed limits are anti-car.

ANYTHING, class, political party, or religion, when left with no oversight or check on it, WILL lead to abuse.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hi BankRobber

MOD EDIT: We don't fucking care what you think.

 

 


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
That almost made sense.  Be

That almost made sense.  Be still, my palpitating heart.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15751
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:Hi

Jean Chauvin wrote:




What "denomination"?

You are an idiot. Other than the fact that he and I are both atheists, we couldn't be more polar opposites politically and economically. We are not different in our position. Both of us don't buy your fictional sky daddy. Other than that, he drives me nuts with his class equals morality and confuses it thinking I automatically hate all wealth. Just like you think I hate all people who believe in god/s when I only hate the claims they make.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1970
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:Is

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Is atheism a belief system.

No.

It's indifference.

It's complete indifference and amnesty from religion.

Liberty.

 

Quit being butthurt over your inability to be as strong as us...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3928
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote:Come on - you know

cj wrote:

Come on - you know religion involves ritual - and what ritual does an atheist have except those they choose for themselves?

Rolling our eyes when we hear theists speak of their faith.

 

From mathematics, we know that the null set is a setset of every set. So if religion is defined as a set of beliefs not based on physical evidence, we're the null set. But still a set.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1970
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:Golf

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Golf (Golf is my religion)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcnFbCCgTo4 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:Jean Chauvin

redneF wrote:

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Golf (Golf is my religion)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcnFbCCgTo4 

 

Oh, god, oh, god, watch the viagra clip......

It's linked from the golf clip --- I'm dieing.  There isn't an emoticon for lying on the floor gasping for air.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


ubuntuAnyone
Theist
ubuntuAnyone's picture
Posts: 862
Joined: 2009-08-06
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:Humanism

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Humanism atheism

Tacking on humanism to atheism doesn't make all theists humanist... some atheists follow Shintoism or Buddhism..

Jean Chauvin wrote:
Is atheism a belief system.

Atheism, broadly speaking, is the LACK of a belief system about god.... Anything else added to that is not inherent to atheism.

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:But

Atheistextremist wrote:
But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics,

Oh? So, a person that doesn't believe in God and has never heard of the term metaphysics before is not an atheist?

How do people manage to confuse the issue so much? It's semantics. We define an atheist as a person that doesn't believe in God. Ergo, a person that doesn't believe in God is an atheist. Wtf does it matter what sophisticated metaphysics they practice?  

 

Quote:
involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

A word means what we decide it means.

Quote:
The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering. Such an assertion has no basis.

The argument cannot even be internally consistent. These people just want to have their cake and eat it too. They pick out a bunch of beliefs regarding the world that they're scared of, bundle it into a term that they label "atheism," and incorrectly reapply the term to everyone that doesn't believe in God.      

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Yeah Butter,

butterbattle wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:
But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics,

Oh? So, a person that doesn't believe in God and has never heard of the term metaphysics before is not an atheist?

How do people manage to confuse the issue so much? It's semantics. We define an atheist as a person that doesn't believe in God. Ergo, a person that doesn't believe in God is an atheist. Wtf does it matter what sophisticated metaphysics they practice?  

 

Quote:
involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

A word means what we decide it means.

Quote:
The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering. Such an assertion has no basis.

The argument cannot even be internally consistent. These people just want to have their cake and eat it too. They pick out a bunch of beliefs regarding the world that they're scared of, bundle it into a term that they label "atheism," and incorrectly reapply the term to everyone that doesn't believe in God.      

 

I agree with you - and thanks everyone for your input.

It's silly but when some one insists something with deep self belief - particularly when they do it after redefining materialism as part of overall metaphysics that includes a natural theology alongside reality - it's surprisingly sticky to unravel on your feet. 

The fact scientific method resists claiming assertion as truth can be exploited by god people in areas where our knowledge is limited - neuroscience being the main one. I wish we better understood the brain. The position "we don't know yet" in the course of an argument can sound feeble regardless of its intrinsic integrity.

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1970
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:The

Atheistextremist wrote:

The fact scientific method resists claiming assertion as truth can be exploited by god people in areas where our knowledge is limited - neuroscience being the main one. I wish we better understood the brain. The position "we don't know yet" in the course of an argument can sound feeble regardless of its intrinsic integrity.

Well, the problem to many people outside of science and technologies, is that the topic of 'Complex Systems' doesn't get factored into any conversations about the universe.

Theists get away with their strawman of lighting hitting a pool of slime, being the theory of abiogenesis.

When it isn't.

It's chemistry. Simple as that. We know what some of the sub systems are, but not the whole picture.

But that's got nothing to do with cosmology, or particle physics.

And none of that has anything to do with neuroscience.

And none of those have anything to do with the price of tea in China.

 

Scientists aren't worried about finding the origins of the universe.

Theists are worried that science and education breeds divorce from religion, and that 'scientists' will eventually put the last nail in the coffin, and spoil their fantasy of an afterlife, and 'buyer's remorse' for a fairytale, and that they won't be able to do what we kids called 'take it over', when we missed the ball...

I can't imagine being in the theists position. How desperate they must feel, that they wonder if the dice they were rolling, were 'loaded' by their priests...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


neptewn
neptewn's picture
Posts: 296
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:Like

Atheistextremist wrote:

Like most of you, I think atheism is a lack of belief in god, period. There's no further religious content to it whatsoever.

But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics, involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

To me such a statement is ludicrous. The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering. Such an assertion has no basis.

What do others think?

Does your brother lack a belief in Odin? and what religion would that be?

Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs


BethK
atheist
BethK's picture
Posts: 43
Joined: 2011-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:The

Jean Chauvin wrote:

The reason why, is because religion is no longer a word. For a word or term to be, there must be one universal definiton to always tie it in.

However, religion has lost that. Today religion can mean:

Jean,

There are a LOT of words in the English language that have multiple meanings. Look in any dictionary. Those are still words, even if they have 2, 3, or 10 definitions.

How's my proselytizing? Call 1-800-FANATIC

Beth


neptewn
neptewn's picture
Posts: 296
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:A term

Jean Chauvin wrote:

A term like boat. This term has a universal meaning. It is a craft that floats on water.

Boat can also mean a full house in poker.. Just saying.

 

 

Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Yeah true

neptewn wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

Like most of you, I think atheism is a lack of belief in god, period. There's no further religious content to it whatsoever.

But brother insists that disbelief in god is still a religious position saying this: "Atheism is in practice a sophisticated metaphysics, involving all sorts of ideas regarding human faculties, the physical sciences, the origin of the universe, the nature of mind and morals, and so on—like any religious view..."

To me such a statement is ludicrous. The fact we consider the meaning of things and the nature of our humanity does not mean we are religious - religion does not own the art of wondering. Such an assertion has no basis.

What do others think?

Does your brother lack a belief in Odin? and what religion would that be?

 

In fact I recently accused him of being an atheist when it came to the thousands of other religious faiths that have existed in the world.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1970
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:A term

Jean Chauvin wrote:

A term like boat. This term has a universal meaning. It is a craft that floats on water.

But it's not the only term that defines a vessel that displaces water with a lighter substance.

Wood floats by ratio of the air in it's structure compared to it's weight.

Steel and concrete achieve buoyancy by their surface geometry and displacement of things that are lighter than water. That's why oil tankers 'float', even though they 'contain' very little air.

Ergo, just saying 'boat' is not signifying anything precise, or elaborate.

So, language and vocabulary is not the major problem, or obstacle, to lame brain ideas.

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


RatDog
atheist
Posts: 573
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
 I don't think that atheism

 I don't think that atheism is a religion.  I think that there is an emerging culture of atheists that tend to read the same books, communicate over the Internet, and occasionally get together in person for various reasons.  This culture would better be termed atheist activism then just plain atheism because not all atheists are part of this culture.  I think that Christians sometimes mistake the emerging atheist activist culture as a religion, but I don't think that there is a definition of religion that would include atheist activists without including a bunch of other unintended things.  For instance if atheist activism is a religion then what about environmental activism?  Just like atheist activists enviormental activists tend to read the same books, communicate over the Internet, and occasionally get together in person for various reasons.  What definition of religion would include atheist activists without including a bunch of other things people don't normal consider religious? 


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level Moderator
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1710
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Religion

What religion doesn't have a place or building where they gather to worship their god(s) on a regular if not weekly basis? There is the reverence factor as well, even to the point of fear. Atheism misses those key factors.

Religion is so self-centered it can only view the non-believers through its own bias. Christians, people of a limited book, especially have issue. The bible refers to pagan gods. So if you don't worship Jehovah you are worshiping Baal, etc. Atheism bewilders Christians because they cannot think outside the Book. So they slap a little paint on the decayed idea, dressing it up to say atheist worship a pagan god. ' You got to serve somebody'. It is slave mentality which is the origins of this faith.

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Posts: 7580
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
 This should have been

 This should have been posted in Freethinkers Anonymous.  I am moving it and nuking a theist post from Jean Chauvin.

 

Please donate to one of these highly rated charities to help impede the GOP attack on America 2017-2019.

Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.


ScientiaPotenti...
Posts: 20
Joined: 2011-04-02
User is offlineOffline
Well, to some extent it is a

Well, to some extent it is a beliefsystem. We(atheists) normally believe that science in one form or the other will create a better place/time, and to some extent its a fact. I might be grasping at straws but I think without a logical and scientific mind that we put faith in to use and derive various mechanics in the world, we wouldn't be atheists. The difference from a theistic viewpoint is that atheists are moving forward in progression, while theist aren't( and why would they? Material wealth and life conditions are meaningless for them and the great spectre will save them at the end of the day either way it turns out).

But it isn't a beliefsystem as theism or religion, whatever religion your parents choose or was taught to worship. As an atheist it is fundamentally important to see facts and test them and ultimately falsify them, to constantly change your opinion. As a theist these standards/opinons are set. Whatever book they think is holy, thats the story. There is so progress for them, because they think they already know everything.

 

Im not so good at this forum bit but the one w a flashy nice skull as a picture mentioned that theists are afraid science will prove them wrong. Personally I think science have managed that countless of times, the problem is more profound then that. They just won't accept proof, their book is better proof or some gibberish that people have distorted it. The thing is that we atheists "involuntarily" believe in a proof oriented world. If we can't prove it, it doesn't exist.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Atheism is not a belief

Atheism is not a belief system. It is not the foundation of our world-view, at least in the most common form.

It is the typical result of a world-view of sceptical enquiry as a basis for knowledge of the nature of reality at all levels.

But it can be the result also of a general apathy toward the whole idea of God, or even, on occasion the result of bad experiences at the hands of believers.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Atheism is a conclusion not

Atheism is a conclusion not a belief.  Put an "a" in front of anything and you have its negation. Agnosticism is the lack of knowing.  Amoral is the lack or morality. Atypical is the lack of typical.  There is not set belief system, no common thread any more than say the set of those who like the Beatles. You can look for tendencies as to why the group likes the Beatles but that is not a system nor a set of beliefs.  For example there is a tendency for those who like the Beatles to have better taste than those who like the Stones.  Atheists tend to have more critical and skeptical thinking than theists.  Theism is an enculturalization entailing language, customs, rituals, ethical norms as a world view whereas atheism is a rational or deductive conclusion about a particular namely a god.

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:For example

TGBaker wrote:

For example there is a tendency for those who like the Beatles to have better taste than those who like the Stones. 

oh, fuck you.  the early stones did solid covers of otis redding, sam cooke, and solomon burke while the beatles were doing a bunch of teeny-bopper carl perkins shit.  plus the only musician in the beatles who could even touch the musicianship of the stones was george harrison, who was always relegated to the back by the other hacks in the group.

but i'm not being totally fair, because i like carl perkins, and i have repeatedly tried to like the beatles, but i just don't get it.  not only do i think the stones were better than the beatles, i'll throw the yardbirds, the animals, and them into that mix as well.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:TGBaker

iwbiek wrote:

TGBaker wrote:

For example there is a tendency for those who like the Beatles to have better taste than those who like the Stones. 

oh, fuck you.  the early stones did solid covers of otis redding, sam cooke, and solomon burke while the beatles were doing a bunch of teeny-bopper carl perkins shit.  plus the only musician in the beatles who could even touch the musicianship of the stones was george harrison, who was always relegated to the back by the other hacks in the group.

but i'm not being totally fair, because i like carl perkins, and i have repeatedly tried to like the beatles, but i just don't get it.  not only do i think the stones were better than the beatles, i'll throw the yardbirds, the animals, and them into that mix as well.

I just said it to get a righteous indignation out of you. Yardbirds, Jimmy Page, Jeff Beck and Clapton. Hey its all good.... Early Fleetwood Mac with peter Green and Jeremy Spencer. By the way the Stones were better rock than the beatles but don't tell anyone.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


bookofra
Posts: 1
Joined: 2011-05-11
User is offlineOffline
Check out Richard'sPoint of

TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
bookofra wrote:Check out

bookofra wrote:

Check out Richard'sPoint of View

Atheism being a belief is like not collecting stamps being a hobby.


 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism