Atheism - The Core Beliefs, and Types of Atheism

Quo Vadis

Atheism is listed as a category under the BBC's Featured Religions and Beliefs Section and is described there as follows ;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/

Atheists are people who believe that god or gods are man-made constructs.

Beliefs

• Religion gets people to believe something untrue.
• Religion makes people base the way they run their lives on a falsehood.
• Religion stops people thinking in a rational and objective way.
• Religion forces people to rely on outside authority, rather than becoming self-reliant.
• Religion imposes irrational rules of good and bad behaviour.
• Religion divides people, and is a cause of conflict and war
• The hierarchical structure of most religions is anti-democratic, and thus offends basic human rights.
• Religion doesn't give equal treatment to women and gay people, and thus offends basic human rights.
• Religion obstructs scientific research.
• Religion wastes time and money.

Atheist and Humanist organisations offer their own rituals for these events that give them meaning and significance without any religious content.

· Naming ceremonies
· Weddings
· Funerals

Sources for Atheist and Humanist ceremonies
A number of books containing guidelines for such ceremonies are published, including some written by Jane Wynne Wilson for the British Humanist Association.
Types of Atheism
· Humanism
· Postmodernism
· Rationalism
· Secularism
· Unitarian Universalism

Would Irish Atheism have any other specific beliefs ?

Which is the most prevalent type of Atheism in Ireland ?

Waking-Dreams

Ah yes, the BBC, the last bastion of rationality. Ignoring for a moment how many times the BBC has backed pseudoscience and flapdoodle, just because something is on a website doesn’t mean it’s correct.

Happy trolling.

Quo Vadis

Waking-Dreams wrote: »

Ah yes, the BBC, the last bastion of rationality. Ignoring for a moment how many times the BBC has backed pseudoscience and flapdoodle, just because something is on a website doesn’t mean it’s correct.

If you don't agree with the BBC's summary, perhaps you could provide us with a counter view to each of the points.

Also what type of Atheism is the most prevalent in Ireland would you say ?

Pushtrak

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Also what type of Atheism is the most prevalent in Ireland would you say ?

The type that lacks a belief in a supernatural creator.

Turtwig

Quo Vadis

Pretty pictures are nice, but if you don't agree with the BBC's summary, at least provide us with a counter view to each of the points. It's supposed to be a discussion forum.

Pushtrak

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Pretty pictures are one nice, but if you don't agree with the BBC's summary, at least provide us with a counter view to each of the points. Its supposed to be a discussion forum.

Not to blow my own horn, but I think I've given you the types, by which I mean to say type, of atheism in my previous post.

Quo Vadis

Pushtrak wrote: »

The type that lacks a belief in a supernatural creator.

Would that not be the same as saying you believe there is no supernatural creator ?

Pushtrak

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Would that not be the same as saying you believe there is no supernatural creator ?

No. Each person, their mileage varies. From "I don't believe, but I don't know" which is agnostic atheism. There is a strong atheism which is more convinced of the non existence of a god.

If this is your way of trying to come out with "No one can disprove god" let me preempt you. It is up to the person making the claim to prove their claim. It is not up to a person to disprove a statement (existence of a god).

Edit: Ultimately, there is really just one type. Lacking a belief in a god. The only reason the other ones are mentioned is when religious try to say "Oh you believe there is no god. Prove it!" thinking that is logical.

It isn't.

Morbert

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Religion gets people to believe something untrue.
Religion makes people base the way they run their lives on a falsehood.
Religion stops people thinking in a rational and objective way.
Religion forces people to rely on outside authority, rather than becoming self-reliant.
Religion imposes irrational rules of good and bad behaviour.
Religion divides people, and is a cause of conflict and war
The hierarchical structure of most religions is anti-democratic, and thus offends basic human rights.
Religion doesn't give equal treatment to women and gay people, and thus offends basic human rights.
Religion obstructs scientific research.
Religion wastes time and money.

Only the statement in bold is believed by all atheists.

18AD

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Which is the most prevalent type of Atheism in Ireland ?

Catholic Atheism. That is, atheism fueled by catholicism.

Pushtrak

18AD wrote: »

Catholic Atheism. That is, atheism fueled by catholicism.

Hm, well spoken. Almost tempted to retract my first post.

Quo Vadis

Pushtrak wrote: »

No. Each person, their mileage varies. From "I don't believe, but I don't know" which is agnostic atheism. There is a strong atheism which is more convinced of the non existence of a god.

That's intresting, so what's New Atheism ?

Pushtrak wrote: »

If this is your way of trying to come out with "No one can disprove god" let me preempt you. It is up to the person making the claim to prove their claim. It is not up to a person to disprove a statement (existence of a god).

There is no irrefutable proof that God does / does not exist.

I'm trying to have a discussion, I was hoping the puerile ping pong could be left out of it.

Turtwig

Morbert wrote: »

Only the statement in bold is believed by all atheists.

Actually no it isn't.

Morbert

Pushtrak wrote: »

No. Each person, their mileage varies. From "I don't believe, but I don't know" which is agnostic atheism. There is a strong atheism which is more convinced of the non existence of a god.

If this is your way of trying to come out with "No one can disprove god" let me preempt you. It is up to the person making the claim to prove their claim. It is not up to a person to disprove a statement (existence of a god).

Edit: Ultimately, there is really just one type. Lacking a belief in a god. The only reason the other ones are mentioned is when religious try to say "Oh you believe there is no god. Prove it!" thinking that is logical.

It isn't.

I wouldn't really agree with this. I think the defining feature of an atheist is the belief that there is no God. I have never met an atheist who rejects the belief that there is no God, and would be interested in why they would call themselves atheist.

Quo Vadis

Morbert wrote: »

Only the statement in bold is believed by all atheists.

That's interesting, would some Atheists disagree with the other statements ?

Morbert

Malty_T wrote: »

Actually no it isn't.

Yes it is.

Quo Vadis

18AD wrote: »

Catholic Atheism. That is, atheism fueled by catholicism.

Would you consider yourself a Catholic Atheist then ?

18AD

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Would you consider yourself a Catholic Atheist then ?

No. I'm neither catholic nor atheist.

Turtwig

Pushtrak wrote: »

The type that lacks a belief in a supernatural creator.

Not to blow my own horn, but I think I've given you the types, by which I mean to say type, of atheism in my previous post.

Strictly speaking you haven't. A person could still believe the cosmos was created by a supernatural process or creator just not a deity. In fact this is one of the beautiful ironies of the major monotheistic religions, even if you concede their God exists, they still have of problem of explaining how the creator created and if they can't say how He did it how do they know it was actually Him who did the creating?

Quo Vadis

18AD wrote: »

No. I'm neither catholic nor atheist.

Would you say there is such as thing as a Catholic Atheist then ?

Pushtrak

Quo Vadis wrote: »

That's intresting, so what's New Atheism ?

That is the catchy phrase generally applied to people who are more outspoken. Rather than just keeping quiet about religion.

There is no irrefutable proof that God does / does not exist.

I'm trying to have a discussion, I was hoping the puerile ping pong could be left out of it.

Ok, thats good. It is just in my experience, every time this line of inquiry is opened it is a gambit for that line of response. And I mean every time.

Morbert wrote: »

I wouldn't really agree with this. I think the defining feature of an atheist is the belief that there is no God. I have never met an atheist who rejects the belief that there is no God, and would be interested in why they would call themselves atheist.

I am more on the strong atheist side... I'd be more inclined to say I don't believe in god than a more agnostic perspective. But... while I'm heavily disinclined to believe in an interventionist god, I find the deistic concept concept a harder one to dismiss. And one that if true, is irrelevant anyway.

Why am I more towards strong atheism than agnostic atheism? Because specific claims made by the bible lack credibility, just as most atheists would say, I'm sure. There are people who just aren't sure at all one way or another. Would not say at all yes or no. These are agnostics. And A/gnostic is only dealing with knowledge. A/theism is about belief. So, lack a belief in god? Guess where that puts one?

Edit:

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Would you say there is such as thing as a Catholic Atheist then ?

Catholic atheist is just a joke about the a la carte catholics who don't really believe in any of the stuff they say. Maybe they have a wishy washy spirituality, but that'd be about it.

18AD

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Would you say there is such as thing as a Catholic Atheist then ?

Yes. I'm not saying that they believe in catholicism, but that their disbelief is based on it. It's a negative definition, as in, it emerges from what specifically it is not, i.e. catholicism.

MungBean

Atheism is the belief that there is no god. And that religion and all that has come from it was born of myth and superstition. I'm an atheist and Irish, I'd imagine a lot of other Irish atheists have the same opinion. Its not a club or an organisation or something to be part of. Its just the knowledge that religion is bunk and there is no god.

I dont think the majority of people would go as far as to define themselves as humanists, rationalists or whatever.

Turtwig

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Would you say there is such as thing as a Catholic Atheist then ?

There is. You see the beauty, or from a theist point of view, annoyance of atheism is that it can entail just about anything. Catholic Atheism, Christian Atheists, Homophobic Atheists, Wiccan Atheists, Pedophile Atheists, Flat Earth Atheists, Misogynistic Atheists, Muslim Atheists, Agnostic Atheists, Ignostic Atheists, Pearlist Atheists, Nephrologist Atheists....

...
*infinity*

It's really is such a useless term, but hey until theists (and, alas, some atheists) realise that's why we don't call each and every individual of the greatest proportion of humans who don't collect bugs non bug collectors the term is still going to be used. Utterly useless, but then again so is your religion.

Quo Vadis

18AD wrote: »

Yes. I'm not saying that they believe in catholicism, but that their disbelief is based on it. It's a negative definition, as in, it emerges from what specifically it is not, i.e. catholicism.

Whats the difference in that and an atheist who is also anti-catholic ?

18AD

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Whats the difference in that and an atheist who is also anti-catholic ?

No, an anti-catholic atheist is precisely what I mean by Catholic Atheist. Sorry if that was not clear. But that I think is the most prominent form in Ireland, for clear historical/societal reasons.

Quo Vadis

Skunkle wrote: »

I dont think the majority of people would go as far as to define themselves as humanists, rationalists or whatever.

But could their personal beliefs tie into one of those world views, but they may not be aware, and for all intents and purposes they could actually be humanists / rationalists etc. ?

Morbert

Pushtrak wrote: »

Why am I more towards strong atheism than agnostic atheism? Because specific claims made by the bible lack credibility, just as most atheists would say, I'm sure. There are people who just aren't sure at all one way or another. Would not say at all yes or no. These are agnostics. And A/gnostic is only dealing with knowledge. A/theism is about belief. So, lack a belief in god? Guess where that puts one?

I would class people who aren't sure as "agnostics" in the sense that Dawkins uses it in "The God Delusion". I myself am an agnostic atheist, and by that I mean I believe there are no Gods, but I cannot technically claim to know for sure.

ShooterSF

Just on this "Religion divides people, and is a cause of conflict and war". My current view is that it's better worded that Lust for power causes war. Religion like patriotism is often used as a tool by clever leaders to get the masses to fight to help one's pursuit of power.

Edit- I'd like to put to vote that it be changed as such at the next Atheist council meeting.

Quo Vadis

18AD wrote: »

No, an anti-catholic atheist is precisely what I mean by Catholic Atheist. Sorry if that was not clear. But that I think is the most prominent form in Ireland, for clear historical/societal reasons.

Fair enough anti-catholic atheist makes sense, catholic athiest is a very unclear oxymoron.

Turtwig

18AD wrote: »

No, an anti-catholic atheist is precisely what I mean by Catholic Atheist. Sorry if that was not clear. But that I think is the most prominent form in Ireland, for clear historical/societal reasons.

Strictly speaking the term your looking for is Catholic Anti Theist who are also Atheists lol. The former group is just a subset of the latter group and distinguishes the people in both groups better. Although I have no proof of their existence, there probably exists some group of people who adhere to Catholic doctrine and traditions but don't believe in a supernatural deity these would be the Catholic Atheists you mentioned. I'm basing this on the fact that we already have documented groups of proclaimed Christians who follow the teachings of Jesus but don't believe in a deity : Christian Atheists. The Catholic Atheist is still an assumption, but I think it's a valid one. Especially when you consider the vast majority of á la carte Catholics alive in Ireland today don't believe in the God of the Bible anyway.

MungBean

Quo Vadis wrote: »

But could their personal beliefs tie into one of those world views, but they may not be aware, and for all intents and purposes they could actually be humanists / rationalists etc. ?

Of course, but that doesnt necessarily make them types of atheism.

Quo Vadis

Morbert wrote: »

I would class people who aren't sure as "agnostics" in the sense that Dawkins uses it in "The God Delusion". I myself am an agnostic atheist, and by that I mean I believe there are no Gods, but I cannot technically claim to know for sure.

Agnostic Atheist ?, I also find that term confused.

An Agnostic is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God, so would an Agnostic Atheist is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God but believes there is no God ?

Morbert wrote: »

Only the statement in bold is believed by all atheists.

That's interesting, would some Atheists disagree with the other statements ?

In particular which ones ?

MungBean

Morbert wrote: »

I would class people who aren't sure as "agnostics" in the sense that Dawkins uses it in "The God Delusion". I myself am an agnostic atheist, and by that I mean I believe there are no Gods, but I cannot technically claim to know for sure.

Do you think that there is a valid reason for proposing the existence of god seeing as all we know of have thought about god has come from religion which I'm assuming you hold no faith in? And if not doesnt that make the question irrelevant and plant you firmly on the side of atheism (the belief that there is no god)

Quo Vadis

Skunkle wrote: »

Of course, but that doesnt necessarily make them types of atheism.

They're listed as types of Atheism, so I guess some people believe they are types.

Turtwig

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Agnostic Atheist ?, I also find that term confused.

An Agnostic is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God, so would an Agnostic Atheist is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God but believes there is no God ?

This is a very common misconception. Agnosticism is not a theological position. It's a position of claiming some value of knowledge to be unknowable for sure. The easiest example is an agnostic theist i.e one who believes in a God but admits that He can't know for sure God exists. An agnostic atheist on the other hand could come in many different flavours (again the uselessness of there term 'atheist) but there are two main ones. The agnostic atheist who believes there is no God and the agnostic atheist who lacks belief in a God. Usually the latter would really just apply to those who aren't aware of the God concept and to be more pedantic they would consider themselves ignostic atheists. There are some exceptions of course.

strobe

Quo Vadis wrote: »

They're listed as types of Atheism, so I guess some people believe they are types.

Some people believe that Muhammad was the last prophet of God Quo. Whatcha gonna do.....

ShooterSF

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Agnostic Atheist ?, I also find that term confused.

An Agnostic is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God, so would an Agnostic Atheist is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God but believes there is no God ?

Don't put yourself down. You got it in one! It's impossible to know if an invisible silent monkey who leaves no trace of his existence in anything he touches is jumping around me the whole time always avoiding collision with me. So I can never say he definitely doesn't exist. Therefore I am agnostic about (or is towards) him.

Do I believe he exists though? No. That makes me an agnostic a-invisiblemonkeyist. Same idea.

Turtwig

Quo Vadis wrote: »

That's interesting, would some Atheists disagree with the other statements ?

In particular which ones ?

Sure. They could disagree with any answer to any hypothetical question which isn't "Do you believe in God(s)?"
e.g "Do you believe in an afterlife?"

Atheist 1 : Yes.
Atheist 2 : No.

Quo Vadis

Quo Vadis wrote: »

An Agnostic is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God, so would an Agnostic Atheist is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God but believes there is no God ?

It can be fairly confusing.

Essentially, atheist/theist are statements of belief, whereas agnostic/gnostic are statements of knowledge.

Basically, you can have four combinations:

Gnostic atheist: one who lacks belief in a god or gods (atheism), and knows that there's no god or gods (gnosticism).

Agnostic atheist: one who lacks belief in a god or gods (atheism), and doesn't know whether a god or gods exist or not (agnosticism).

Gnostic theist: one who believes in a god, and knows that a god exists.

Agnostic theist: one who believes in a god, and doesn't know whether or not that god exists.

Agnostic atheism and agnostic theism are the only reasonable positions. The other two--gnostic atheism and gnostic theism--are unreasonable and irrational.

That's a simplification, in many respects. Definitions of atheism can vary: you can have positive/negative atheism, strong/weak atheism or explicit/implicit atheism, or a combination of all three (which is essentially what positive/negative atheism is).

Also, in the above gnostic doesn't refer to Gnosticism (capital g), which is a religious orientation. Agnosticism and gnosticism are statements of knowledge in the above, just as atheism and theism are statements of belief.

Quo Vadis

Malty_T wrote: »

Basically any answer to any hypothetical question which isn't "Do you believe in God(s)?"

Which ones would you disagree with yourself and why ?

MungBean

Quo Vadis wrote: »

They're listed as types of Atheism, so I guess some people believe they are types.

While atheism is merely the absence of belief, humanism is a positive attitude to the world, centred on human experience, thought, and hopes.

From the site you referenced. Thats where I get confused. How can you have different types of a lack of belief by adding different beliefs ? I see them all as different belief systems but atheism itself is a lack of belief.

Morbert

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Agnostic Atheist ?, I also find that term confused.

An Agnostic is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God, so would an Agnostic Atheist is one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God but believes there is no God ?

Yes. I can have great confidence in the claim that there is no God, but I cannot show it to be true. A strong atheist would claim that God is logically impossible, and would claim to know God can't exist just as 2+2=4 is known to be true in the real number system.

That's interesting, would some Atheists disagree with the other statements ?

In particular which ones ?

I, for example, disagree with the claim that religion necessarily causes people to think irrationally. It certainly can do so, but it is not a given.

strobe

Edit: Scratch that. Religion is too broad a term for the poll I had in mind to apply.

Turtwig

Morbert wrote: »

I, for example, disagree with the claim that religion necessarily causes people to think irrationally. It certainly can do so, but it is not a given.

Yeah but's that not an atheistic claim. There's really no such thing, other than the aforementioned lack of belief or positive disbelief in a deity.

sink

I call myself an atheist but strictly speaking I'm ignostic. I take a non-cognitive position on the god question. Before one can even ask the question of gods existence one must first have a rational definition of 'god', one that can be logically examined and established to be true or more presciently untrue.

If 'god' is undefined or loosely defined an infinite number of possibilities can be attributed the title and so it is nothing more than a vacant label devoid of meaning and not worthy of further consideration. If 'god' is defined in such a way that it can't be disproved, by it's very definition the existence or non-existence of the entity has no discernible impact on our reality and so the question is moot. If 'god' is defined in such a way that it is self contradictory it can't logically exist.

If 'god' is defined as a rational entity, the question of it's existence can be approached, but why apply with the label 'god', one that carries significant anthropological baggage and so can be easily misconstrued. Without initial supporting evidence in the first place there is no reason to begin to examine the possibility of it's existence. Kind of like searching for a needle in a haystack without reason to believe there is a needle to begin with.

Another thing which often causes confusion.

Atheism, at it's most basic level, is simply a lack of belief. A stronger version of atheism is the asseration that the individual believes that a god or gods do not exist. Those two claims are completely different and worlds apart. It's important to understand the difference.

Given that, that's all that atheism is. Atheism doesn't necessarily imply humanism, naturalism or and other claim listed in the OP. They're additional philosophies and viewpoints. More often than not a strong atheist (the latter of my two definitions above) can be assumed to be, say, a humanist or a naturalist, or have some additional belief that's related to atheism in some respects; but, it's important to note that any additional beliefs don't necessarily follow from atheism.

Morbert

gvn wrote: »

It can be fairly confusing.

Essentially, atheist/theist are statements of belief, whereas agnostic/gnostic are statements of knowledge.

Basically, you can have four combinations:

Gnostic atheist: one who lacks belief in a god or gods (atheism), and knows that there's no god or gods (gnosticism).

Agnostic atheist: one who lacks belief in a god or gods (atheism), and doesn't know whether a god or gods exist or not (agnosticism).

Gnostic theist: one who believes in a god, and knows that a god exists.

Agnostic theist: one who believes in a god, and doesn't know whether or not that god exists.

Agnostic atheism and agnostic theism are the only reasonable positions. The other two--gnostic atheism and gnostic theism--are unreasonable and irrational.

That's a simplification, in many respects. Definitions of atheism can vary: you can have positive/negative atheism, strong/weak atheism or explicit/implicit atheism, or a combination of all three (which is essentially what positive/negative atheism is).

Also, in the above gnostic doesn't refer to Gnosticism (capital g), which is a religious orientation. Agnosticism and gnosticism are statements of knowledge in the above, just as atheism and theism are statements of belief.

Gvn, do you believe there is a qualitative difference between someone who believes there is no God, but does not claim to know, and someone who lacks a belief in God and does not claim to know? I ask because your list would class both these people as agnostic atheists, which implies there is no qualitative difference.

Turtwig

Morbert wrote: »

Yes it is.

You claimed "Religion gets people to believe something untrue."
Two examples:

People who are not aware of the existence of other religions and don't believe in a deity.
People who belong to a religious faith and happen to be atheist.

Oh and one final example : me.

Morbert

Morbert wrote: »

Gvn, do you believe there is a qualitative difference between someone who believes there is no God, but does not claim to know, and someone who lacks a belief in God and does not claim to know? I ask because your list would class both these people as agnostic atheists, which implies there is no qualitative difference.

Yeah, I think there's a huge difference--but as you point out that difference isn't explicit in the definitions I've used. My definitions are overly simplistic for use in more technical conversation, really. If you wanted to get more accurate you could include both weak and strong atheism, or even implicit and explicit atheism.

There's obviously a world of difference between a) somebody with an absense of belief, and b) somebody who believes in absense. So if you wanted to make that obvious you'd have to explicitly state that in the above defintions, I guess. For somebody who doesn't really know what atheism is too many definitions can get overly confusing, even more so than they already are.