It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My evolving view on “is atheism a religion?”

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Now, just to point out my starting point. I normally classify myself as an atheist, because I think it is historically obvious that none of the ancient religions are even remotely right in the historical claims they make.

I normally would scoff at someone saying atheism is a religion, because how can the lack of a belief be a religion?!?!

But atheism is kinda making a claim.. a claim to KNOW there is no god. Something that is also unknowable..

It’s more than fair to say there is no evidence for a god, especially the one discribed in the worlds biblical traditions, but it definitely isn’t sciency to say FOR SURE, ever..



I think presently we consider those “who think there is no evidence for a god” as atheists, but wouldn’t that really be agnostic????



Agnostics are the ones saying they don’t know, right???


Well, with science if you can’t test it, you can never realy know....

So maybe there are no atheists.. maybe everyone is really agnostic?

There is no way to prove or disprove the concept of a god . It is just too broad..


Maybe I have this wrong, but normally I consider “ I see no evidence for god” and “I don’t buy any of the worlds ancient religions”, as an atheist, but now I’m not sure that isn’t wrong..



If someone is claiming to know FOR SURE there is no god. Then that would kinda be a religion, because even with no evidence and all logic being against it. No good scientist would ever claim to KNOW something like that.


So wouldn’t claiming to know there isn’t a god, be just as ridiculous as claiming to know there is one, and almost as ridiculous as claiming to know exactly who that god is????


Hell, is claiming to know there isn’t a god, ACTUALLY claiming you do know exactly who he is?? He is no one, lol.
edit on 4-4-2018 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


How is someone who believes in a religion any different than someone who believes in a political ideology? Think about it, a person who believes in a GOD that can't be proven is no different than a person who believes in philosophy by a MAN which can't be proven? That idea is an idea right?

Think you need to demand a refund on your so called education?



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

What?!?!

Did you even read the post lol?!?



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   
You could consider it a faith
Having said that I have noted many non believers who evangelise their faith and there are atheist churches



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox




But atheism is kinda making a claim.. a claim to KNOW there is no god. Something that is also unknowable..


Atheism makes no claims. It rejects claims as they arise.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: seeker1963

What?!?!

Did you even read the post lol?!?


Yea I did. You are claiming you are Athiest because you believe there is no evidence that God exists. My response to you was sure there is no evidence however how many humans have believed words from a man which has lead our society to wars and such? Just as religion has promoted wars so has spoken words disguised by religion?

All I know at this point is the world has gone mad, and I want a solution before it's too late?



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox


But atheism is kinda making a claim.. a claim to KNOW there is no god. Something that is also unknowable..




















That is not what atheism claims, your misrepresenting the argument so that it’s easier to debate. Atheists for the most part claim that there is not enough evidence for or against the existence of a god to make an accurate decision either way.

If your into using logic to dismantle ideologies I’d suggest pointing that logic gun back at yourself and pulling the trigger a few times just to see what happens.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well then isn’t that agnostic??

Army agnostics the ones who openly claim not to know???


I come to this from just thinking myself, but also noticing a lot of “anti-organized religion” science educators such as Neil degrassse Tyson claiming he was an agnostic..

Then wondering why he said agnostic and not atheist??

Well because a good scientist would never claim to know.. and isn’t it agnostics who claim “not to know”.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox




Well then isn’t that agnostic??


No, because an agnostic won't reject a claim, they will center it, say they don't know, one way or the other.


Tyson claiming he was an agnostic..


"God" is in the definition. Neil deGrasse Tyson is searching for answers and "truth", seeking the "god of the gaps", so to speak.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox
My viewpoint is that of a current Christian and former atheist.
We need to be aware that there is a a three-cornered argument here, between the religious and the atheists and the agnostics.
When agnostics are arguing that atheism is a form of faith, they are leading towards "Atheism is not rational, you should call yourselves agnostics instead".
When some religious folk argue that atheism is a form of faith, they are reacting to their undestanding of atheism as a repudiation of faith, and I'm not sure they are leading towards much more than "Look at these atheists being wrong". There might be some purpose in the argument that "If you can accept any faith at all, you might as well accept ours", but I can't see that working on anyone.
Both lines of argument depend on imposing a definition of atheism which is not used by the atheists themselves, which undermines their value.
My own self-understanding at the time was "I don't believe in God, and that's what makes me an atheist". Whether atheism involved any kind of faith or assumptions was neither here nor there. I think the current atheists on ATS would normally say the same.
Are you playing devil's advocate here, trying to put forward what is normally the argument of the non-atheists?



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Not believning Ions someone elses religulous dogma is not a 'religion', even though people try to classify you as either or, good or bad , and send you to heaven or hell, lol.

Never mind them , they aren't the judge of you, the only power they have over you is your belief in their impossible quandary...

Not believing in something is healthy, wait till all the evidence is in. That evidence takes a life time to accrue.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Is a matter of having the experience. Some people believe in God only by faith, other (like me) has had the experience to see beyond the physical world.

The fact that any of the statements cannot be proved, it does not mean that they are both wrong.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

um...belief in a god or that there is no god does not constitute religion.


the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms: faith, belief, worship, creed; More
a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"
a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.


One can believe that there is no god and go about their daily business... no religion required.

Just as one can believe that there is a god and go about their daily business.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:26 AM
link   
If we look at religion as:

"a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance."

Then, it can most certainly be a religion.

Personally, I think that making the term exclusive to social groups who believe in deities to be a bit inaccurate.

If we go even further to define it as a certain, predictable set of behaviors set around a topic which someone finds supreme importance, that it enables us to identify some of the problematic (and beneficial) aspects of a certain level of zealotry in a given social group.

EtA: I think that one of the issues in social groups that are contrarian in nature, is the thought that we can't become like the group we oppose. Obviously, this is an incorrect assumption, but the inherent perceived superiority can lead to it all the same.

Any time we begin to see our social group as superior to another that we actively engage with, we run the risk of becoming exactly like what we "hate."
edit on 4-4-2018 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Quantumgamer1776

Then isn’t that an agnostic??



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:34 AM
link   
These kind of debates can rage on due to the fact that everyone is using their own definition, and then lumping someone in a box.

This not only goes for what atheism or agnosticism is, but also what a religion is, or what faith is.

Basically, faith is a normal human trait, and is closely connect with trust, confiding, hope based on certain facts, factoids, reasonings and other distortions for good measure.

When a person, believing in a personal god claims I am religious because I do not, I really have to laugh.

But admitting to the difference what we actually can demonstrate as being factual, and what we have come to consider fact, would be the first step in lowering the antagonism.

Often the arguments are larded with emotion.

To me, I can see where I can agree with a personal god believer, a non believer in a personal god, a deist, and even spiritualist of many stripes.

Once we can agree that it is about our own treatment of our fellow man, things can become very interesting.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
But atheism is kinda making a claim.. a claim to KNOW there is no god. Something that is also unknowable..


Exactly. Which makes it a "faith", not a religion. Atheists will argue that one into the ground without accepting logic though.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Then isn’t that agnostic.. not atheist??


I think all the organizaed religions are ridiculous and fairly easily disproven..

However, no one can prove or disprove the concept of some form of creator..

Rather it is a computer program and this is all a simulation, or whathave you.




posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Assuming they are making that claim. Then yes.

But I’m not sure very many people do make that claim.. that most people are not in the “there is zero evidence” column.

Maybe I have the wrong definition of each.


I’m not seeing how both agnostics and atheists could not know and still be separate entities.



posted on Apr, 4 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Serdgiam

Then you just broadened religion to include EVERYTHING.

Hard core poker players would be a religion. Hard core car fanatics would be a religion.

So I’m not sure that helps. If anything we need to be defining things better, not broadening definitions.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join