Is Atheism a religion?

[OpiatefortheMasses]

Atheism a religion? It seems highly unlikely that the polar position to theism would be considered a religion but it seems the comparison is made quite a bit. When you look at what can be considered intrinsic properties of a religion it really doesn't stick to well. Unlike a religion, atheism has no systematic beliefs, rituals or doctrine so as to how it could be considered a religion in that rite is a mystery. If any of you honestly believe that atheism is a religion I would much appreciate it if you explained why you believe that and how you believe this is true.

[pax]

...every theist must believe that volition is present in the black box by necessity; indeed it is difficult to imagine how else to define 'theist'...

There are "hopeful theists" who aren't sure, but nevertheless have hope, and choose to live as though volition were in the black box. I suppose there are also "anxious non-theists," who aren't sure but who hope that volition is not inside the box, and who choose to live as though volition were not inside the box. Numerous such distinctions could probably be made...

...But an atheist may state, (as I do) that 'I do not believe that volition must necessarily be there'. Note that this is not the same as the (strong atheist) position of arguing 'that volition must necessarily not be there'...

Such distinctions apply to contingent things--things outside the black box--but not to anything inside the black box.

...Since I consider the Universe could possibly exist without the presence of volition in the black box, I see no sense in assuming its presence...

Is this because you believe there is no genuine volition outside the black box--i.e., that we humans do not possess even the tiniest measure of genuine volition?

I am undecided about the depth to which our experienced 'free will' extends. I recognise that the experience of free will is meaningful for all practical human purposes, (except maybe when one includes philosophy amongst our 'practical purposes!':roll:)

...is possible that volition might be present, but I do not assume that it is.

Again, as far as I can see, such distinctions only apply to contingent things outside the black box. If you admit that it is possible for volition to be present inside the black box, you are admitting that there is some possible world in which volition is present inside the black box. But if we remember, the black box is the non-contingent reality which undergirds all of contingent reality. This means that if there is even one possible world in which the black box contains volition, it follows that the black box contains volition for all possible universes--which is just another way of saying that if volitional black box is possible, then volitional black box is necessary.

This looks like a very strong argument at first, Chris. But it assumes that all possible Universes would have to be contingent on the same non-contingent causes as our own, and I don't see why that should have to be so. I could dream up half a dozen scenarios in which possible worlds exist whose causes are completely independent of whatever caused ours.

I would be very interested in knowing what you suppose caused our universe to exist.

(Not a one-liner, but a legitimite query without the need of futher verbiage.)

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 80:

I would be very interested in knowing what you suppose caused our universe to exist.

I propose the very conditions you propose for the existence of your god.

[Bust Nak]

Do you have any independent evidence to suggest that chance and necessity exist? For all we know, everything which appears to happen by chance or necessity could, in reality, be entirely manipulated by the volitional element of our black box of non-contingent reality.

I have nothing that cannot be dismissed as something manipulated by the volitional element of our black box of non-contingent reality.

(not that I actually believe this, but it isn't obviously any less likely than the supposition that volition doesn't exist).

But it is obvious that we can't see someone fiddling with lets say gravity.

[EduChris]

Do you have any independent evidence to suggest that chance and necessity exist? For all we know, everything which appears to happen by chance or necessity could, in reality, be entirely manipulated by the volitional element of our black box of non-contingent reality.

I have nothing that cannot be dismissed as something manipulated by the volitional element of our black box of non-contingent reality.

(not that I actually believe this, but it isn't obviously any less likely than the supposition that volition doesn't exist).

But it is obvious that we can't see someone fiddling with lets say gravity.

See here

[Chase200mph]

Atheism a religion? It seems highly unlikely that the polar position to theism would be considered a religion but it seems the comparison is made quite a bit. When you look at what can be considered intrinsic properties of a religion it really doesn't stick to well. Unlike a religion, atheism has no systematic beliefs, rituals or doctrine so as to how it could be considered a religion in that rite is a mystery. If any of you honestly believe that atheism is a religion I would much appreciate it if you explained why you believe that and how you believe this is true.

Atheism a religion? It seems highly unlikely that the polar position to theism would be considered a religion but it seems the comparison is made quite a bit. When you look at what can be considered intrinsic properties of a religion it really doesn't stick to well. Unlike a religion, atheism has no systematic beliefs, rituals or doctrine so as to how it could be considered a religion in that rite is a mystery. If any of you honestly believe that atheism is a religion I would much appreciate it if you explained why you believe that and how you believe this is true.

Answer: Though I am not a theist, I don’t really fit into the atheist category either….So I am compelled to answer (a great OP by the way) that organized religions treat atheism as just another religion mostly because their text and/or doctrine teach them how easy it is to dehumanize them as they do another religion. Dehumanizing others makes it easier to either destroy them or place their needs and or beliefs into a lower stratification because after all, they are not really quite human. This formula for atrocities has been present throughout recorded history and happens every time a religion and government relinquish their boundaries…..after all; the greatest threat to this Country isn’t economic strife, it’s believing we are a Christian Nation. : S

[showme]

Atheism a religion? It seems highly unlikely that the polar position to theism would be considered a religion but it seems the comparison is made quite a bit. When you look at what can be considered intrinsic properties of a religion it really doesn't stick to well. Unlike a religion, atheism has no systematic beliefs, rituals or doctrine so as to how it could be considered a religion in that rite is a mystery. If any of you honestly believe that atheism is a religion I would much appreciate it if you explained why you believe that and how you believe this is true.

Atheism is not a religion except by a great stretch of definition. But I have encountered some atheists for whom atheism might as well be a religion. For them, anything about religion (usually Christianity in particular) is inherently wrong and stupid and is to be put down in the most demeaning terms. And this attitude is independent of any evidence or argumentation presented to them. It is in effect an article of faith. Happily this is a lot more prevalent on some other sites than here. But it definitely exists.

It is that type of atheist that is often in mind when atheists are accused of practicing a religion.

First of all, one must define what one is talking about. Every atheist may have a slightly different answer, but if you use a dictionary, maybe you can come to a starting point. (Merriam-Webster)

Definition of ATHEIST
: one who believes that there is no deity

As for your non atheist definition, whereas atheist in large, think that "Christianity" "is inherently wrong and stupid and is to be put down in the most demeaning terms" is a bit of a generalization. Although the Athiest probably have cause to think that "Christianity" is more than a bit hypocritical, and probably a little put off by their duplicity, as per their historical abominations.

The only problems with athiest getting together and setting up a common dogma, is that it generally does't work. Cases in point being North Korea, Mao's China until Mao's death, Lennin's Russia, until Stalin's death. Whereas the U.S. may have problems of double minded hypocricy, they still have a set of rules based on Common Law, which is based on the 10 commandments, which although under pressure from the Progressive left, still puts the fear of John Law into the heart of any who would follow their anarchist hearts.

I think the "Christians" should just leave the athiest alone. They may serve a purpose in pointing out the falacies of the "Christian" dogmas. Maybe the "Christians" will wake up and fix their problems if the athiest were a bit more focused in pointing out the hypocricies in the basic doctrines and dogmas of the churches.

[Chase200mph]

From Post 80:

I would be very interested in knowing what you suppose caused our universe to exist.

I propose the very conditions you propose for the existence of your god.

Answer: “Cause�….no cause is the answer, a cause doesn’t exist outside of time and space does it, I guess PAXs wants the word cause to substitute for the word god?

[Chase200mph]

Christianity has so much hypocrisy, hypocrisy that is governing its every move, how can a rational mind even begin to believe in this religion? Creationists base all of their beliefs in the book of Genesis, a Christian RE-written version of the text. Never mind that the Jewish bible has a different version, never mind that the teachings of the Zohar (another version) dispels everything in Genesis, never mind that there are other disputed versions within the realm of Judea….this is the one they base their belief in, this is the one the word of god resides in….even though this version came to them from ROME!
What does this mean, it means their version is a much younger version, even younger than their own bible…. It also means the bibles version has little in common with the original Judean tale….Therefore, science must be wrong because this book of Genesis that no Christian knows anything about is believed in because it’s the bible found in the dining room table ….what a JOKE!

[showme]

Christianity has so much hypocrisy, hypocrisy that is governing its every move, how can a rational mind even begin to believe in this religion? Creationists base all of their beliefs in the book of Genesis, a Christian RE-written version of the text. Never mind that the Jewish bible has a different version, never mind that the teachings of the Zohar (another version) dispels everything in Genesis, never mind that there are other disputed versions within the realm of Judea….this is the one they base their belief in, this is the one the word of god resides in….even though this version came to them from ROME!
What does this mean, it means their version is a much younger version, even younger than their own bible…. It also means the bibles version has little in common with the original Judean tale….Therefore, science must be wrong because this book of Genesis that no Christian knows anything about is believed in because it’s the bible found in the dining room table ….what a JOKE!

Pauline "Christianity" has little to do with the Law, the prophets, or the Testimony of Yeshua. The problem is that you seem to want to throw out the baby with the bath water. The founders of this country, such as Jefferson, saw the problems with religion, and made sure that state and religion were separated, but he also understood the good parts of the bible, that part which was not corrupted by Rome. The strength of the country comes from the constitution those men wrote, and it is now in jeopardy of being over turned by people without the moral character and strength of men who believed in God, and acted on their beliefs. You may think you know more then those simple men, but I think todays society has been corrupted by too many Dunkin Donuts, too many episodes of Friends, and associate professors, such as our current president Obama. Junk food, junk TV, and junk schooling. You don't need to worry about the Roman church. It is going to be eaten alive by the countries that supported it. Italy is now going to tax the church, and eventually, so will Greece, Ireland, Portugal, etc. The only money left in those countries belongs to the churches.

[otseng]

Christianity has so much hypocrisy, hypocrisy that is governing its every move, how can a rational mind even begin to believe in this religion? Creationists base all of their beliefs in the book of Genesis, a Christian RE-written version of the text. Never mind that the Jewish bible has a different version, never mind that the teachings of the Zohar (another version) dispels everything in Genesis, never mind that there are other disputed versions within the realm of Judea….this is the one they base their belief in, this is the one the word of god resides in….even though this version came to them from ROME!
What does this mean, it means their version is a much younger version, even younger than their own bible…. It also means the bibles version has little in common with the original Judean tale….Therefore, science must be wrong because this book of Genesis that no Christian knows anything about is believed in because it’s the bible found in the dining room table ….what a JOKE!

Moderator Comment

This would be considered a blanket statement and would be personal rant rather than presenting any argument for a position.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster.