nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Is Atheism a religion?

Malpaisian

Discuss!

Find more posts tagged with

atheism religion

bullsh*t vortex

this is a tag

Quick Links

Comments

Whelpling

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

The nonsense persists.

Ah! A great footing for reasoned discourse.

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

If a group of people interested in history collected annually, would you re-frame it in terms of religion? Going to some history lecture once a year is equally as 0% religious as atheists doing it. Atheists don't do it 'to feel better' as a group. It's simply a shared common thread, as is these history meetings. There's nothing more to it.

Certainly there's often not. You apparently failed to comprehend that my explanation was of a way in which I could see why some people compare atheism to religion.

If a group decided to set up an ahistorical interest group, discussing the point that there is no history, would it be inconceivable that some people might see this as history related? Or would everyone who saw it as history related be talking nonsense?

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Religion requires a gigantic leap of faith in believing resurrections and flying horses which has exactly zero evidence. It requires pray, suspensions of nature, believing you'll survive death, etc.

Sure it does. Not sure how this is relevant to my 'nonsense' post above.

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

How many times do we have to say - there's NOTHING in common which makes atheism akin to religion. This 'collective' analogy works for everything, as it isn't a wholly exclusive religious practice for people with something in common to meet.

You can say it until you're blue in the face and all the cows are safely in the barn. That doesn't mean that people will believe it on face value. It also doesn't mean that I'm excluded from attempting to recognise factors that make people think atheism = a religion and discuss them in order to dispel the myth. I don't take what religious people say at face value. Why should I expect that different rules apply to atheists?

"No" is a fine enough answer. So is mine. And while you may not attend atheist meetings, history groups or whatever for a sense of community, for meeting people, for company - many people do. Of course the most obvious counter to your point is that a history group would be a group of people coming together to discuss a shared interest. A group of atheists would be coming together to discuss a lack of interest in something, and, according to many atheists, the ONLY thing that we all have in common is our lack of belief in a god or gods. So then, it is quite easy to see how the religious person looking in would be perplexed as to why a group is needed to essentially discuss a shared interest in... nothing. Hence my attempt at explaining that many atheist meetings and gatherings tend to be concerned with a push for secularism and equality.

Maybe I should just sit in my corner of the cool club and sneer at the religious dolts.

Whelpling

yellowfish wrote: »

But how someone could be so stupid to confuse Atheism with a religion, I just do not understand.

I don't think it's stupid - just misinformed. Well. most of the time. Sometimes it probably is just to annoy us.

But personally, when given the chance to say "Hey, it's not a religion and this is why"... and ALSO point out that many atheists are humanist people-lovers? I'm gonna take it! Engaging in reasonable discussion (but not to the point of forehead injury) has always worked better for me than sitting on high and scoffing.

yellowfish wrote: »

its lucky I do not own a gun

NEWSFLASH NEWSFLASH - Atheists want to shoot the religious!

Turtwig

Odd, a discussion about atheism being a religion and atheist gatherings, yet no mention or comparisons with vegetarianism yet. . .

endacl

A vegetablist eh? So, explain the whole tomato/fruit salad thing then if you're so smart!

Just so we're clear, I personally don't believe in vegetables, but a friend claims to have had a vegetable-related near death experience once. He won't accept the reality that it was a hallucination caused by lack of rashers.

Galvasean

No no no, threads like this aren't for proper discussion!

Turtwig

Galvasean wrote: »

No no no, threads like this aren't for proper discussion!

Indeed but they usually spark the best type of thread.

Nervous Wreck

Atheism is a religion like this thread is not a shit, waste of time.

18AD

Atheism is a religion like a non sequitur is a puddle sandwich.

Atheism is a religion like this sentence is false.

Atheism is a religion like realism goes thai sign. :pac:

Michael Nugent

Whelpling wrote: »

One thing that theism, or organised religion does very well is create a community (church etc) for its belongers. Atheists coming together is in some way a replica of that very positive part of religion...

It is a significant mistake to see the creation of community as a property of religion that atheists are replicating.

I would rephrase the above quote to something like this:

One thing that people and other animals do very well is to create communities for themselves. Religions and atheist groups and nations and tribes and tennis clubs and residents associations and internet discussion boards and troops of apes and pods of dolphins and herds of elephants are examples of that very positive aspect of living together.

Also, the creation of communities has negative effects as well as positive ones.

bnt

Michael Nugent wrote: »

It is a significant mistake to see the creation of community as a property of religion that atheists are replicating.

OP - if you listen to philosopher Alain de Botton, that's exactly what atheists should be doing: replicating the trappings of religion, explicitly using community-building techniques from churches, even building temples to atheism. To say his ideas got short shrift, here and anywhere else atheists talk about these matters (example), is putting it politely.

Why is this? There are different opinions, but my take is that de Botton fails to understand that atheism is a result of a genuine search for truth by honest people. It's not a game that we're out to "win". I'm not an atheist to make a point, or to position myself in a certain way in the sight of others. Self-knowledge and integrity are important not only in what you do, but also in how you do it, and what he suggests has a whiff of "the ends justify the means" about it. I don't just want the "results", I want to know that the results were the outcome of a sustainable process - then they're more likely to mean something and last.

PS: atheism is a religion like silence is a noise.

spannerotoole

Since it can't be proven absolutely that there is no god(s), atheists take it on faith that there are no gods. Therefore atheism is a religion.

Also ask is evolution true, use the test, can it be observed (no, because it happens over millions of years, all we know about fossils is that something lived, we don't know if it produced offspring.) Can Macro evolution be done in a laboratory? (Macro evolution, can one species evolve into another totally different species, even darwins finches had issues with this, birds begat birds and came from birds.) Can you show me the maths on evolution? (well can you?)

MagicMarker

spannerotoole wrote: »

Since it can't be proven absolutely that there is no god(s), atheists take it on faith that there are no gods. Therefore atheism is a religion.

Also ask is evolution true, use the test, can it be observed (no, because it happens over millions of years, all we know about fossils is that something lived, we don't know if it produced offspring.) Can Macro evolution be done in a laboratory? (Macro evolution, can one species evolve into another totally different species, even darwins finches had issues with this, birds begat birds and came from birds.) Can you show me the maths on evolution? (well can you?)

I have faith that my girlfriend won't cheat on me, is that also a religion?

And yes, evolution can be observed.

Penn

spannerotoole wrote: »

Since it can't be proven absolutely that there is no god(s), atheists take it on faith that there are no gods. Therefore atheism is a religion.

One of my favourite quotes (not sure by who or where I heard it though) is "Atheism isn't a lack of belief in Gods; it's a lack of belief that there are any Gods to believe in." Atheists don't take it on faith that there are no gods, because that would imply that there are gods but we just don't believe in them. Religious people take it on faith that there are gods, even though it can't be absolutely proven. Therefore, religion is a religion, and atheism is not a religion.

spannerotoole wrote: »

Also ask is evolution true, use the test, can it be observed (no, because it happens over millions of years, all we know about fossils is that something lived, we don't know if it produced offspring.) Can Macro evolution be done in a laboratory? (Macro evolution, can one species evolve into another totally different species, even darwins finches had issues with this, birds begat birds and came from birds.) Can you show me the maths on evolution? (well can you?)

We could, but you don't seem to understand the very basics of evolution, so I think we'd just be wasting our time.

celticcrash

Our Richard who are`nt in heaven.
Dawkins be your name.
The king dont cum.
Your will be done.
On earth as it is`nt in heaven.
For give us this thread. Our daily post.
And dont forgive us ourtreaspasses as
we blast those with piss who tresspass against us.
And lead us to coke and hookers
but deliver us from modarators.
Richard.

Enkidu

spannerotoole wrote: »

Macro evolution, can one species evolve into another totally different species, even darwins finches had issues with this

Those Galápagos Finches won't believe anything, you should hear them about relativity!

The Mad Hatter

celticcrash wrote: »

Our Richard who are`nt in heaven.
Dawkins be your name.
The king dont cum.
Your will be done.
On earth as it is`nt in heaven.
For give us this thread. Our daily post.
And dont forgive us ourtreaspasses as
we blast those with piss who tresspass against us.
And lead us to coke and hookers
but deliver us from modarators.
Richard.

You just reminded me of this thread, and this fine post by Zillah:)

Zillah wrote: »

Our Father who aint in Heaven,
spurious be thy name.
Why must there be some,
who art so dumb,
so as to waste earth for ficitious heaven.
Now let us say the king is dead,
and invent yet newer trespasses,
as we berate those who trespass against us,
and give into our hungry temptations,
and deliver us pizza from dominos.
Amen.

spannerotoole

Enkidu wrote: »

Those Galápagos Finches won't believe anything, you should hear them about relativity!

Tweet Tweet.
I meant darwins finches came from finches and their offspring were also finches, they didn't become crows or sparrows but they remained finches.

spannerotoole

Penn wrote: »

One of my favourite quotes (not sure by who or where I heard it though) is "Atheism isn't a lack of belief in Gods; it's a lack of belief that there are any Gods to believe in." Atheists don't take it on faith that there are no gods, because that would imply that there are gods but we just don't believe in them. Religious people take it on faith that there are gods, even though it can't be absolutely proven. Therefore, religion is a religion, and atheism is not a religion.

We could, but you don't seem to understand the very basics of evolution, so I think we'd just be wasting our time.

Without absolute proof its a position that is taken on blind faith. I don't believe in the young earth stuff, but i do believe that everything was created.

Dades

Uh oh.

Enkidu

spannerotoole wrote: »

Tweet Tweet.
I meant darwins finches came from finches and their offspring were also finches, they didn't become crows or sparrows but they remained finches.

At least that's what the finches reported when Darwin interviewed them, however given that they have issues with evolution anyway (as you already mentioned) it's fairly obvious that they're biased creationist finches.

Doctor DooM

Do Galvasean and I really have to do the Transformers-religion-as-a-parody-of-real-religion thing AGAIN?

Penn

spannerotoole wrote: »

Without absolute proof its a position that is taken on blind faith. I don't believe in the young earth stuff, but i do believe that everything was created.

Blind faith would suggest no evidence. We have lots of evidence. We have mountains of evidence. Enough to categorically prove whether God exists or not? No, but enough to tip the scales much further in one direction than the other.

Besides which, do you have faith that there isn't an invisible, weightless, odourless, completely silent Chinese midget standing right behind you? Is that one of your religions? You don't have absolute proof that he isn't there, so do you worship him too?

Canis Lupus

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Do Galvasean and I really have to do the Transformers-religion-as-a-parody-of-real-religion thing AGAIN?

Yes please. I want to do my dinobot gag again!

spannerotoole

but the fact remains that everything is faith based, for example, i have faith that the earth will complete another rotation around the sun, i have faith that my bus will come, i have faith that our politicians will screw things up in a completely new and original manner, but i could be wrong on all of these things, the same way you could be wrong about there being no god(s).

Enkidu

spannerotoole wrote: »

but the fact remains that everything is faith based, for example, i have faith that the earth will complete another rotation around the sun, i have faith that my bus will come, i have faith that our politicians will screw things up in a completely new and original manner, but i could be wrong on all of these things, the same way you could be wrong about there being no god(s).

When people resort to silly philosophical games like this, all I read is "I have no argument, so instead here is something meaningless". Stop for a minute and think how stupid a sentence the statement "I have faith the Earth will complete another rotation" is. In order to produce it, you have to distort faith out of its normal meaning to become a word meaning:

The state of less than 100% philosophical certainty

Which, of course, is not the meaning of the word. It then becomes something which can be said about anything and since it's universally applicable, it's universally worthless. It also sounds like something a finch would say.

Captain Chaos

spannerotoole wrote: »

but the fact remains that everything is faith based, for example, i have faith that the earth will complete another rotation around the sun, but i could be wrong on all of these things, the same way you could be wrong about there being no god(s).

That has got nothing to do with faith. That is to do with the proven and tested time and time again laws of relativity and physics. The rest of those things are down to the human condition or error including the existance of God. You are not comparing like for like.

Squeeonline

Not a religion.

We are more an organisation with a loose collection of ideologies. You wouldn't start calling the FG party a religion because its members had aligned beliefs.

Our beliefs happen to be about religion in the same way that FG are about how the country should be ruined. That doesnt make atheism a religion.

Quite a few atheists (my self included) would be offended to be called religious.

smokingman

spannerotoole wrote: »

but the fact remains that everything is faith based, for example, i have faith that the earth will complete another rotation around the sun, i have faith that my bus will come, i have faith that our politicians will screw things up in a completely new and original manner, but i could be wrong on all of these things, the same way you could be wrong about there being no god(s).

YOU have faith, I have facts and the ability to discern randomness from subjective projection.

You have faith because it's all you know and the world would probably be too scary for you if, for one second, you couldn't insert your god, ideas of fate, luck etc into any situation or concept you can't understand.

I have trust in people but this is not faith, this is an opinion based on my own interaction with them. You see trust and faith as the same and the problem arises when you apply this "trust" to concepts like gods or fate - these are not people; these are abstract concepts that cannot confirm your trust like actual real people can.

Penn

spannerotoole wrote: »

but the fact remains that everything is faith based, for example, i have faith that the earth will complete another rotation around the sun, i have faith that my bus will come, i have faith that our politicians will screw things up in a completely new and original manner, but i could be wrong on all of these things, the same way you could be wrong about there being no god(s).

But you're using multiple definitions of the word 'faith'.

faith
noun
1.confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.

Definitions 1 & 4 are not the same as definitions 2, 3 & 5.

"i have faith that the earth will complete another rotation around the sun" - Definition 1: confidence or trust in a thing (the movement of the earth)
"i have faith that my bus will come" - Definition 1: confidence or trust in a person (the busdriver/bus organisation)
"i have faith that our politicians will screw things up in a completely new and original manner" - Definition 1: confidence or trust in a person or thing (or in this case, confidence or trust in their inability to perform their job correctly), possibly a bit of Definition 4 too: belief in anything (failure in general of politicians and the political system)

"i have faith God exists" - Definition 2: belief not based on proof, Definition 3: belief in God and Definition 5: system of religious belief

Zombrex

spannerotoole wrote: »

but the fact remains that everything is faith based

That would make the term "faith" pointless, if faith just means believing something.

Since that isn't what it means the point is someone moot.

Faith is the act of having a belief (most of the time in relation to a positive outcome) that is based not on assessment of the evidence this outcome will occur but on trust of some individual that they will ensure it does.

I believe that if I drop an egg it will fall to the ground and smash based on the evidence gathered of previous such occurrences. I am not trusting the egg to ensure this will happen. Neither the egg nor the floor have any control over this process.

I have faith that if I was stuck in town at 4am without any money one of my friends would lend me taxi fair because I trust that they would wish to look out for me. I am putting my faith in them that they will not simply leave me alone in the city centre walking home, though this is a possible outcome. They have control over the outcome and I trust that they will ensure the outcome that benefits me will be the one that comes about.

Some where along the line modern religious people started redefining "faith" to some how just mean believing stuff based on reasonable assessment of the evidence, probably because they didn't like the implication previous that religious faith was in fact belief in something based on little evidence.