The unBelief-O-Matic!

Dades

What kind of atheist are you?

You scored as The Atheist

You moderate an atheism forum. You are surrounded by scientific, apathetic, militant and spiritual atheists. It's no wonder you don't believe in God.

Scofflaw

Wicknight wrote:

To me a militant atheists is someone who believes that belief in God is ultimately harmful and should be stopped by methods that ignore the civil rights of believers

For example I don't believe Richard Dawkins to be a militant atheists, where as I do think someone like Marx or Lenin were. While they all believed that religion was "a bad thing" (TM), how they go about convincing others is quite different

I would not consider myself a militant atheists, though I will (and have) argue with anyone that religion is ultimately a bad force in society. But I recongise that everyone has a right to believe what they wish.

You'll be an aggressive secularist, then...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Zillah

What kind of atheist are you?
You scored as a Scientific Atheist
These guys rule. I'm not one of them myself, although I play one online. They know the rules of debate, the Laws of Thermodynamics, and can explain evolution in fifty words or less. More concerned with how things ARE than how they should be, these are the people who will bring us into the future.

Scientific Atheist - 83%
Agnostic - 50%
Militant Atheist - 50%
Spiritual Atheist - 42%
Angry Atheist - 33%
Apathetic Atheist - 25%
Theist - 8%

This is acceptable. Although I suspect the questions weren't weighted quite correctly. Some questions were a little ambiguous.
For example:

Praying doesn't have anything to do with God. -- From an objective point of view or the intent/purpose of the person praying?

The universe is definitely structured. -- Well yes, there is a structure to it, but does that mean to imply theres an intelligence behind it?

I don't have a problem with religion as long as it's not shoved down my throat. -- In what fashion? Does pro-Christian laws and legislature count? In God we trust...one nation under God, anti abortion laws etc?

Zombrex

Scofflaw wrote:

You'll be an aggressive secularist, then...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Would I? Doesn't aggressive secularist imply, well, aggression (behaviour that is intended to cause hurt or pain)

I would call myself an assertive secularist/atheist.

Schuhart

You scored as a Scientific Atheist

Militant Atheist 67%
Scientific Atheist 67%
Spiritual Atheist 58%
Apathetic Atheist 50%
Agnostic 33%
Angry Atheist 33%
Theist 25%

This would be fine except I'm not a scientist and my knowledge of the third law of thermodyamics, evolution and whatnot largely comes from just reading popular paperback science books.

So I'd propose, in my case, the rather optimistic description should be tailored along the lines 'happy to make definitive pronouncements based on a superficial understanding, on grounds that a superficial understanding of reality is just as good as a deep appreciation of some old religious book someone found under a tree'.

5uspect

Schuhart wrote:

This would be fine except I'm not a scientist and my knowledge of the third law of thermodyamics, evolution and whatnot largely comes from just reading popular paperback science books.

Its the second law that's the biggest problem!

1. You can't win
2. You can't break even
3. You can't get out of the game

philologos

Wicknight wrote:

I would not consider myself a militant atheists, though I will (and have) argue with anyone that religion is ultimately a bad force in society.

"Militant atheism is the denial of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is harmful and restricts human potential" - If you agree with that you are a militant atheist.

5uspect

Jakkass wrote:

"Militant atheism is the denial of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is harmful and restricts human potential" - If you agree with that you are a militant atheist.

Militant Theism then must be is the acceptance of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is beneficial and expands human potential?

Just because someone thinks something is bad is no reason to label them a Militant.
Having a "notion" does not make someone a militant.
Having a gun and being willing to use it against those with different notions does.

Zillah

Jakkass wrote:

"Militant atheism is the denial of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is harmful and restricts human potential" - If you agree with that you are a militant atheist.

But...thats patently absurd. Religion could be the single greatest cause of human suffering throughout all the universe and say nothing about whether God exists or not.

philologos

I'm quoting that definition by the way it's not my own. But that's apparrently what militant atheism is.

Zillah

Well apparently whoever wrote the definition is an idiot.

5uspect

Jakkass wrote:

I'm quoting that definition by the way it's not my own. But that's apparrently what militant atheism is.

Can you see the blatant attempt by whomever came up with that quote to vilify those who don't believe as being some sort of terrorist?

Zillah

Well I for one think the use of the word "militant" is terribly disingenuous. A militant is someone who takes up weapons to fight...there are very few militant atheist groups that I'm aware of...

I'd consider people like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins as Secular Advocates or something like that; someone who campaigns for a secular society by convincing people of the merits of secularism and criticising religion and its consequences.

Scofflaw

I don't see how there can be such a thing as "militant atheism" without there being some form of organisation. I would have said it's the main thing that distinguishes "miltancy" from "passionate advocacy".

Is anyone aware of such a group?

cordially,
Scofflaw

pokirin

Zillah wrote:

Well I for one think the use of the word "militant" is terribly disingenuous. A militant is someone who takes up weapons to fight...there are very few militant atheist groups that I'm aware of...

Depends if you insist on reading cheap dictionaries, "militant is a term meaning vigorous or aggressive" not implying the use of any weapons as such.

Is the word / phrase you are grasping for - military - as in - "the use of military force".

It would not be correct to say "the use of militant force".

JC 2K3

You scored as a Scientific Atheist
These guys rule. I'm not one of them myself, although I play one online. They know the rules of debate, the Laws of Thermodynamics, and can explain evolution in fifty words or less. More concerned with how things ARE than how they should be, these are the people who will bring us into the future.

Scientific Atheist: 83%
Spiritual Atheist: 67%
Apathetic Atheist: 58%
Agnostic: 50%
Angry Atheist: 42%
Militant Atheist: 25%
Theist: 8%

Cool.

Zillah

pokirin wrote:

Depends if you insist on reading cheap dictionaries, "militant is a term meaning vigorous or aggressive" not implying the use of any weapons as such.

Is the word / phrase you are grasping for - military - as in - "the use of military force".

It would not be correct to say "the use of militant force".

Yes but there's also number 2: "engaged in warfare; fighting." Which in my experience is by far the more common usage. When I see "Islamic Militants" referred to on the news I don't think of people who are out campaigning for Islam in a non-violent fashion.

5uspect

Scofflaw wrote:

I don't see how there can be such a thing as "militant atheism" without there being some form of organisation. I would have said it's the main thing that distinguishes "miltancy" from "passionate advocacy".

Is anyone aware of such a group?

cordially,
Scofflaw

A Google search for militant atheist organisation did bring up this*.

Protestors gathered outside the US Supreme Court building this week to demand that the judicial body reinstate the right to pray in public places. Among those present was William “Bill” Murray, son of the late Madelyn Murray O’Hare, the militant atheist who won a 1963 court battle to prohibit prayer in public schools.

So by association that would make the American Atheists a militant Atheist organisation.

---

*a gem from the first poster on the above page:

Since public prayer was forced from the schoolrooms, crime has increased fourfold in the US.

Scofflaw

5uspect wrote:

A Google search for militant atheist organisation did bring up this*.

So by association that would make the American Atheists a militant Atheist organisation.

Yes, I can see that being true. Even I might describe them as such.

So, anyone here a member of American Atheists?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Zillah

5uspect wrote:

*a gem from the first poster on the above page:
[Since public prayer was forced from the schoolrooms, crime has increased fourfold in the US.]

And the decline of pirates is responsible for global warming, we know

Goodshape

You scored as a Spiritual Atheist

Ah! Some of the coolest people in the world are Spiritual Atheists. Most of them weren't brought up in an organized religion and have very little baggage. They concentrate on making the world a better place and know that death is just another part of life. What comes after, comes after.

Spiritual Atheist 83%

Angry Atheist 75%

Apathetic Atheist 67%

Scientific Atheist 58%

Militant Atheist 58%

Agnostic 33%

Theist 25%

robindch

Jakkass wrote:

Militant atheism is the denial of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is harmful and restricts human potential

I've never come across that definition and can't imagine where you got it.

While religious people might believe that their religion is beneficial and increases human potential, and conclude from that that their specific understanding of god exists, the reasoning certainly doesn't work in reverse. Religion -- what happens when lots of people think they believe the same thing as each other get together in some way -- is, by that definition, a completely man-made thing and whether or not it is good or bad (I believe it is appalling) has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the deity who is believed to exist, actually exists or not.

Or in other words, the effects of the religion and the existence of the thing which is asserted by the religion are two completely separate things. I can't imagine anybody would claim to be a "militant atheist" with that definition, as it's based upon a piece of really lousy reasoning.

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote:

I'm quoting that definition by the way it's not my own. But that's apparrently what militant atheism is.

As has been pointed out that definition doesn't even make sense ...

Its funny though that theists (and I believe you that this definition isn't yours but I imagine it was written by a theists) tend to have a difficult time understanding why someone is an atheist

I've been having this discussion with Wolfsbane on the Christian forum. He thinks that scientists embrace "atheists" science such as evolution so that they don't have to follow God. It was pointed out to him that if a scientists is atheists he doesn't believe that God exists so following or not following is rather immaterial. Wolfsbane didn't seem to accept this, instead apparently believing that atheists all deep down know there is a God and are just kidding themselves.

This definition reminds me of that thinking, the use of the word "denial" implying that it is true but for reasons of resentment towards organised religion atheists pretend that God doesn't exist.

Of course still not sure why this would make someone a "militant"

5uspect

Scofflaw wrote:

Yes, I can see that being true. Even I might describe them as such.

Litigious yes, but hardly militant.
For example when you think of militant Theists, the lovely people in Jesus Camp spring to mind, not to mention the trigger happy types in the middle east.

I know that militant can sometimes refer to an aggressive attitude and not specifically a physically violent stance but by lumping atheists into the militant pigeon hole usually retained for the violent types is deliberately misleading.

philologos

Pesonally I don't agree with the term myself. But alas I found the source from a footnote in my LC Religion book.

Paul Davies - God and the new Physics. Penguin Science, 1990.

Scofflaw

5uspect wrote:

Litigious yes, but hardly militant.
For example when you think of militant Theists, the lovely people in Jesus Camp spring to mind, not to mention the trigger happy types in the middle east.

I know that militant can sometimes refer to an aggressive attitude and not specifically a physically violent stance but by lumping atheists into the militant pigeon hole usually retained for the violent types is deliberately misleading.

A lot of this is in the connotations, I think. What the terms suggest to me are the following:

"Militant atheists" - marching, shouting, banners saying "God Out", leaders with megaphones chanting "what do we want!? God Out!! When do we want it!? NOW!!" Atheists breaking up church meetings, trying to shout down sermons.

"Militant atheism" - organising the above in a coordinated way.

"Aggressive secularist" - some bloke red-faced and screaming at you from a couple of inches away about how the state shouldn't favour any particular religion, or allow a religious agenda to dominate public life.

I admit, I've never seen any of the above. Frankly, if there's ever even been an "Atheist Pride" march I'm unaware of it. Anyone else?

The definition Jakkass offers, on the other hand, appears to describe a particular moral/philosophical theory. I don't see how a theory can be described as "militant".

cordially,
Scofflaw

5uspect

Scofflaw wrote:

A lot of this is in the connotations, I think. What the terms suggest to me are the following:

"Militant atheists" - marching, shouting, banners saying "God Out", leaders with megaphones chanting "what do we want!? God Out!! When do we want it!? NOW!!" Atheists breaking up church meetings, trying to shout down sermons.

"Militant atheism" - organising the above in a coordinated way.

"Aggressive secularist" - some bloke red-faced and screaming at you from a couple of inches away about how the state shouldn't favour any particular religion, or allow a religious agenda to dominate public life.

I admit, I've never seen any of the above. Frankly, if there's ever even been an "Atheist Pride" march I'm unaware of it. Anyone else?

The definition Jakkass offers, on the other hand, appears to describe a particular moral/philosophical theory. I don't see how a theory can be described as "militant".

cordially,
Scofflaw

I'd agree with that. I'm sure there are plenty of aggressive atheists and secularists, however they don't really seem too organised.

slasher_65

Hmmmmm. lurking for a while. Oh well!

I get to be a scientific Atheist. Hurrah!

Dades

slasher_65 wrote:

Hmmmmm. lurking for a while.

Welcome... now lurk no more!

pH

Jakkass wrote:

"Militant atheism is the denial of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is harmful and restricts human potential" - If you agree with that you are a militant atheist.

Well that's a fine definition as long as you accept say that the definition of militant Christianity would be as follows:

"Militant Christianity is the acceptance of God's existence based on the notion that religious belief is good and frees human potential" - If you agree with that you are a militant Christian.

By this definition most Christians would be militant, what's good for the goose ... and all that.