#1
|
||||
|
||||
Atheism, Philosophy, and Religion
I would like your perspective on the idea that atheism is a religion, so that I may further my own philosophy on this subject. I wish to withhold my opinion until I hear others.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Atheism is not a religion. In fact, that's all it is. A lack of religion. That's the definition no matter how you look at it. There are some philosophies that are often associated with atheism such as skepticism, existentialism, and sometimes nihilism, but all that is required to be an atheist is the lack of belief in gods.
To paraphrase Bill Maher, atheism is to religion as abstinence is to sex. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
A philosophy refers to the investigation of truth. Read another way, that means philosophy refers to the finding of beliefs based on one's own rational analysis.
People have told me before that Christianity in itself isn't a religion because there are many branches of Christianity; Lutheranism, Catholicism, Protestantism, Anglicanism, etc. They referred to Christianity itself as a philosophy and that the branches themselves are religions. Accepting this, one would then reach the natural conclusion that a religion can be based on a philosophy. And accepting that, one could then easily reach the conclusion that atheism is merely a philosophy with a different focus; that is, lack of belief of God. What would one then call skepticism, existentialism, and forms of nihilism? One couldn't call them religions because of the lack of belief in a godly figure. They are simply philosophies that align with another, larger philosophy. In that case, accepting "Christianity" as a philosophy because of the lack of specific alignment with a particular branch may be a bit inaccurate. In fact, the difference between a religion and a philosophy is merely the belief in a godly figure, or many godly figures. Questioning that, one would then likely state that a religion cannot be a philosophy because a philosophy refers to truth and holy books are typically told as the word of God when they're really written by men guessing to what God wants, and therefore most likely inaccurate. However, there are clearly those few I established in the gay marriage thread who are in the minority, who wish to find the truth in the context of their religion, rather than rejecting it outright or going wholesale for what may be proven as false because religion > truth. Would those people be philosophers? More specifically... -Philosophy --Religion ---Religious Branches ----Accepters of Religious Branch (90%) ----Questioners of Religious Branch (10%) --Atheism ---Atheistic Branches ----Accepters of Atheistic Branch ----Questioners of Atheistic Branch Does this seem about right? Or would "Accepters" be in a different section than "Philosophy" because they inherently don't question what is true? |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
A- as a prefix means without.
Theism means the belief in a god or gods. Religion is a collection of beliefs. Atheism is the lack of that collection of beliefs. It's not a religion, it's the lack of one. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
However that doesn't answer the question about philosophy's involvement in those two principles.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
I'm an atheist. I don't have a religion. I also find there to be a difference in how I define religion and philosophy: Philosophies are supported by rational reasoning; religions are supported on faith in whatever beliefs comprise it.
As for the atheist movement - yes, there is one, but just how other minority movements are, such as the gay rights movement: it's an attempt to publicize their existence and advocate social acceptance. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
People should have known better than to ever take Holy's bait on this one.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson This is an example of someone who questions religion with their own rational reasoning. Reason therefore has a place in faith, and therefore blurs the line between philosophy and religion. TheOcean: If you're not going to contribute, don't troll. We get enough of that from Rebbie. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Science is Science Philosophy is Philosophy Religion is Religion =They all may have traits or ideals which are similar or work in the same vain, but they are still clearly distinct and different ideologies. 2=Hmmm, to me there is not an atheism movement because atheism is the lack of something. It is a paradox to claim movement in nothingness. However, there are clearly atheists who have taken their lack of beliefs to the take level and made it an action form of believing in non-belief; it is just that the English language has yet to form a word for this evolution in ideology...neo-atheists? Though I do agree this movement is more of a pressure group than an academic or religious order. Religion is about finding a way to live a life closer to your spiritual self...etc, this group is about social reform and activism. PS Ocean, I think Holy has matured and does just want a fun academic...y debate. ^^ |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I doubt either side is going to convince the other... but the idea that atheism is a religion really baffles me. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
I consider myself a non practicing Christian. I know all the values and try to apply them to my life. I don't try to force my religion on others, because I figure if people from other religions are doing they're thing and it's working for them, I won't mess with them about it. I don't pray as regularly in good times, but when things are bad, and nothing else seems to be working, I will pray as a last resort. I ask God for grace and strength within myself to deal with certain stressors, and I pray for change in others when my interference seems to hinder the situation.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I call your attention, however, to the statement you've made that questioning religion is rational whereas believing religion does not. Do you believe that the teachings of religion are all wrong, or do you think certain moral lessons from parables may benefit people in a real way? Furthermore, do you believe that the act of questioning in itself makes you a reasonable individual, regardless of whether or not your questioning ultimately leads you to believing in that religion? Quote:
Personally I separate those who align in politics and those that align in philosophy differently, with philosophy representing an attempt to find the truth and politics referring to those who distort the truth for gains that may or may not be selfish. Typically philosophical atheists are ones that have observed, considered, and made their choice, stating reason as their banner, and generally don't want to hassle people. There are many teenage atheists out there who think they have it all figured out, like there are many teenage homosexuals or heterosexuals who think they already know everything there is to know about their respective sexual orientations, but really they haven't experienced enough to really make that call. However, I feel like the ones politicized are inherently... the political ones. In that, I mean the ones who think they're right and try to force their being right down everyone else's throats without really realizing they act exactly as what they hate about mainstream religion. I view philosophy as an eternal quest for the truth. I feel people who claim they've found the truth and don't question themselves at all are just... strange. I have a need to question myself constantly. As Fared said, I've matured. Quote:
Last edited by HolyShadow; 07-22-2012 at 02:00 AM. |
#14
|
||||||
|
||||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know how many atheists I know would think that it's a philosophy, because in your everyday life it's not something you think about that often. But it's most certainly not a religion, being just a lack thereof. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I'll find a link for you eventually but digging around for that stuff will take a while. Quote:
To be fair, philosophy used to be a form of pseudo-psychological science iirc, but that's since been replaced by psychology. Quote:
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
I consider myself as an atheist, and although I don't see it as a religion, I'm told a lot by people around me that it is a religion, in a way. Religion requires faith, and atheism is, basically, a faith or belief that there is no God. Then again, my parents tell me I can't even call myself an atheist, since I don't believe in any specific religion but I do believe some things about the after life and the concept of karma. So maybe I'm just spouting rubbish and what I'm saying doesn't mean anything.
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Sounds like you're agnostic, or spiritual.
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Atheism is just spiritual-default. Some people just need to fill in all life's boxes.
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
I agree with several of the comments above about philosophy and how it relates to religion. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You hardly have to believe in a god to have a system of morals either. Neither does lacking belief in god mean believing that life is meaningless. I don't really intend to engage in a religious discussion, but the things you said there were equivalent to somebody else generalizing all Christians as religious zealots who will kill any infidels, similar to the common view of the Islamic belief. In any case, Atheism is most certainly not a religion. |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Actually, there is already something with the definition of "does not claim to have a religion" - Agnosticism. Yes, atheism is the belief that there is no god, meaning it does lack the belief in any known god. What atheism does believe, though, is as said, the lack of any being called "god". |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Edit: too lazy to swap, but muddled Atheism and Agnosticiam somewhat
Im afraid, in what you are describing is not Atheism, but nihilism. Agnosticism is being uncertain or disinterested in there being a God, but is accepting that there could be. Atheism is the belief that there is no God because there is no scientific evidence of God. Should proof of a God be shown, they are willing to follow. You are also missing the point of the term. Theism translates into god, monotheism is a belief in a single god, while polytheism is many. You also keep confusing 'religion' with faith. Religion implies a collective group following a particular set of spiritual beliefs, while faith is the beliefs of one person and one person alone. While you can use language and throw it around to make the claim that Atheism's a religion, it is more putting your faith in science and science alone to find the answers. Atheists and agnostics would take morals either as a cultural construct or a biological instinct, such as we will not kill a member of our own tribe/family unless it is necessary. Nihilism, what you are descibing, is the absolute belief that nothing beyond what is physically here exists, there is no moral vitue, and everything we do is fundamentally pointless. There are even more extreme subgenres of this such as antinatalism, which states we should stop having children because it only causes more suffering. Last edited by grimfang999; 03-10-2013 at 09:53 PM. |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
As I said. Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god in its most basic form. Somebody who does believe that there isn't a god can be considered an atheist, true. But a religious zealot can still be considered a Christian in that same vein. It's the distinction between lacking belief in something and claiming to have proof that something does not exist. What you are doing is combining the two under one blanket statement. That is the exact definition of making a generalization. I did not claim that believing in a god sets the foundation for a system of morals, though a large number of religion practitioners do treat it that way. Now... You appear to be using two definitions for 'claiming there is or is not a god' here. Certainly, things of higher importance can be considered a "god" to somebody, in a very loose sense of the term. But that's not what the core of the religious debate is about. It is literally about whether something made creation of its own will or it did not. To apply the term 'religion' as loosely as you're trying to do destroys any applicability it can have even to itself. For instance, take somebody who values hard work and achievement above anything else. Under your logic, they would consider such concepts the driving force and motivation behind their life, or their "god". But you can hardly say Atheists are claiming that does not exist. It is simply watering down the concept of "religion" and "god" in what is honestly a pretty twisted logic. It does not apply in context. I will say it again. Atheism cannot be defined as a "belief". Its core definition is a lack of belief. Agnosticism is the stance that the existence of a deity cannot be proven or disproven. These are two very different stances, where Atheism's core is that there is no proof of a higher power in the context of religion. The sentence you posted, Quote:
If this isn't coming across clear enough, just look at the roots of the word, A- and -Theism. Theism is the belief that at least one deity exists, at its base. The root "A-" is used to denote an opposite concept. "Atheism", then, is the lack of a belief that at least one deity exists. |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
In Agnosticism, you are unsure of what you believe in, but refrain from claiming to believe in anything because of that. That is what "not believing in a religion" is. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Breathing is pretty important to me. Would that be considered my god? No. That's pretty silly. And you could hardly say that, in that context, atheism would involve lobbying against breath-gods. You're confusing the term 'religion' with 'anything anybody holds as fact'. That is not what religion is. |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
Obvious troll is obvious.
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
In all plain reality, an atheist saying that atheism is not a religion is exactly like saying, "I'm an atheist, but I don't believe in atheism." |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not sure why you're trying to redefine a word. Atheism is not a belief. It is the lack of belief. That's the word. Killshot summed it up best in the second post of this thread.
Quote:
To make another example, it's like trying to classify zero as a number in the same context that one, two, and so on are considered numbers. Yes, it represents a counting concept the same way one, two, and so on do. But it doesn't represent a number. It represents the lack of a number. As an aside, it is incredibly offensive for you to imply that atheists think of themselves as gods. It is not a belief. It is an organized movement in the same way that religious zealots have an organized movement: That is, people trying to use a concept to force their view on the world. It is not appropriate to generalize the way you are. I will allow your statement about differing definitions of religion, but I touched upon that earlier. You can't define religion to be the same thing as a worldview. It destroys the meaning of the word and renders any discussion pointless. |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
OK, as my view is basically that of Zairak's, Killshot's and Grim's I will not brother repeating what they have already said, but I would like to clarify a few terms for everyone's benefit.
Atheism=The lack of a belief in God/Gods. Simple as that. Though, in twisted logic 'some' Atheists, such as myself possibly, could be defined as believing in a lack of belief due to the strength of their convictions, the point remains that a positive plus a negative still makes a negative. (It is also worth noting that Atheists who do take an anti-religious stance do not need to be Atheists to do this. Their beliefs or convictions against religion are against the religion's rules, teachings and practices, not the idea of God itself, and as such, their actions actually in truth have f-all to do with their atheism and everything to do with their personal/social issues with a particular religion/religions, issues which those who believe in God could equally hold.) Religion=This is not the belief in God. Religion is a defined organisation based on a commonly held set of 'spiritual' teachings, rules and practices used to find holy or spiritual enlightenment. This is why, even if Atheism is a belief (which it is not to most peoples' minds), it is still not a religion. To be Atheist takes no action at all, there are no rules, teaching or practicies, and there is certainly no holy or spiritual enlightenment to it; it is just a state of being. As I said, some Atheists may be more open about their Atheism, but that does not make them anymore or less of an Atheist because other than their lack of belief, there is no common practice or anything of such regard required to be considered an Atheist. Philosophy=Religion is not a philosophy, philosophy again is not something defined by teachings, rules or common practices, it is a school of reasoned thought about culture, man and existence. Philosophy is arguably a brand of academic thought and in that regard can be part of an organisation/other organisations, but fundamentally philosophy is about studying and learning through reason. Religion on the other hand, as I stated, is about finding holy or spiritual enlightenment. Agnosticism=This is about accepting the lack of evidence for/against God and thus abstaining from a conclusive answer. Note conclusive, that does not mean they do not have any opinion. Belief=To think something is correct/true, even if one does not have the evidence to prove it so. Note, you believe in anything, not just god, so even if one does not accept the logic that + plus - = -, and holds fast to the idea that Atheism is a belief in not believing, that does not make Atheism a religion, it just makes it a twisted form of belief; however, I will now go on to explain why I think calling it a belief is wrong. Faith=(This is important, because this is different to belief) to believe that something is truth/right, even if you cannot prove it to be so. This is much stronger than belief, and that is why it is only a noun, not a verb. Believing is something we just do, we do it a lot actually. Faith, however, is something we have (not something we do) and to have faith therefore, requires us to have faith in something. You can have faith in a belief, but you cannot believe in faith. That is the key difference, and this is why religious people often say they have faith in god, and not just believe in him. Someone who believes that God exists, may not have faith in him. Anyway, I am just digressing now, my point here is that you cannot have faith in Atheism because there is nothing there to have faith in, which is why I would assert that it is not a belief, let alone a religion. It is lack of them. Morals=A commonly held set of ideals by a group or culture based on a range of academic, religious, cultural, social, and scientific practices and norms. So yes, religion can be used to form morals, but to claim religion is the only mandate upon which morality can be defined by or based upon is wrong. Furthermore, to say that without religion morals would just be instincts is crazy. Other animals base their actions on instincts, but humans are far more self-aware than that, and as such, we base our morality on a range of reasoned and logical deductions, even the unreasonable ones. This is why humans experience social evolution as well as physical. PS As final point, the Law is neither moral nor religiously motivated, but I cannot be bothered to define Law when the confusion its definition was small, unimportant just not worth the hours it would take me to give any sort of adequate definition of what the Law really is. Though I guess I could explain what it is meant to do/ not do easily enough. There are probably other terms which require further definition, but for now, I feel this clears up any misunderstandings which have been displayed in a way which is detrimental to the progression of this debate. |
#30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|