Is Atheism a belief system? A religion?

[Manc Skipper]

The only problem in the arguing that one doesn't like apples is that not liking or eating apples doesn't lead to a moral code and hence a religious practice. One has no need to diligently practice not collecting stamps. One can simply abstain.
But I think anyone here would be hard pressed to make a case for a lack of moral code in any camp. There is even honor among thieves they say.

What does the above ramble mean? Not collecting stamps is a moral imperative? Morality is not exclusive to belief in gods.

Was the final reference to thieves a passive aggressive snark at atheists?

 

[Cable]

What does the above ramble mean? Not collecting stamps is a moral imperative? Morality is not exclusive to belief in gods.

Was the final reference to thieves a passive aggressive snark at atheists?

No, morality isn't exclusive to belief in God or gods, but it is a mandate of whatever belief one might hold.
I have no need to attack anyone. The facts are the facts. You will find a few such attacks on this thread, but not by me. It was an innocent example meant to illustrate that even the worst of us have a moral code.

 

[Arcana XV]

The only problem in the arguing that one doesn't like apples is that not liking or eating apples doesn't lead to a moral code and hence a religious practice. One has no need to diligently practice not collecting stamps. One can simply abstain.
But I think anyone here would be hard pressed to make a case for a lack of moral code in any camp. There is even honor among thieves they say.

Your calling a moral code a religious practice doesn't make it one. I thought we already agreed to disagree on that. Why do you find it so impossible to think outside your comfort zone? We wouldn't need such a vast vocabulary if words and their meanings were interchangeable at will whenever we don't fully grasp certain concepts. Start with this: morality and religion are not the same thing. They can intersect, but they can also exist fully independently from one another. I can think of at least a dozen religious beliefs the world over that are utterly morally repugnant.

 

[Removable Mind]

For those who have to ask the question: Is Atheism a belief system...or is Atheism a Religion. Please do yourselves a favor. Get educated. Seriously!

 

[Paschendale]

Science does not attack my God. My God created the science you understand.

Knowledge of nature, biology, the cosmos, history, and anthropology contradict the supposed teachings of your god. Science disproves it.

What is the basis of any moral code without God? It would seem that any morality is what the subject would like it to be. Since there is no ultimate authority, there is no reason to think anything different. One could say they seek the greater good, which most do, but exactly what that greater good should look like is the stuff of personal belief.
As the creator of all, God knows what is our greater good, both as individuals and as a society. Denying God puts you in a position to work out what you think is your own greater good.

Our morality comes from our biology. The things we call evil are those that harm us, bring us fear and suffering. Those are directly related to our physical nature. Killing and harming people is evil. That is the morality for corporeal, temporal beings, not immortal or spiritual ones. We call cooperation and community good. That is because we evolved as social creatures. We benefit from working together with our tribe or family. It's not really subjective at all. There's no personal belief involved.

Call my idea silly, but none have been able to show it false. Just that they don't believe it, or that it is silly.
Religion is in essence the practice of your moral code.

Many religious beliefs do not deal with moral codes, and many moral codes do not deal with religion. Trying to draw false equivalencies gets you nowhere.

Atheists have a hard time realizing their religion is faith based.

It's quite telling that your attempt to demean atheists is to liken us to your religion. We would lose what moral or intellectual high ground we had if we were merely practicing a religion, wouldn't we? But what does that say about your religion?

When atheists go to extremes (actively opposing Christian displays at Christmas, for example) they're not acting 'because of atheism' - they're acting 'as a person against the status quo' or something like that. Labeling it 'as a religious belief' is a false presentation of motives. That, to me, feels more like it's spawned by jealousy/irritation/"I don't like it" - rather than honest feelings and theological alignment.

We act out of dislike of religion being afforded special legal status, in clear violation of the constitution. We're certainly not jealous and would be more than happy to adopt a "live and let live" policy, if only the religious would do the same.

Fact? Usually unbelievers aren't so bold. Evidence of that fact?

What evidence do you use to conclude the fact that Zeus (the supreme god who is greater than all other gods) isn't real?

A large majority of self-described atheists are agnostic atheists. It's not the belief that god does not exist, it's the lack of belief that a god exists.

That's all atheists. That is, people who are not theists. Theists believe. Atheists do not. That's not an "agnostic atheist". Those terms contradict. That's just the definition for atheists. Not having a theistic belief.

 

[Evan Shad]

Our morality comes from our biology.

My Morality doesn't. You say that whatever causes us pain and suffering is evil, do you realize this is hedonism? (If so I bet you don't practice it, at least not completely). To define Morality in terms of pleasure seems to be to drop Morality altogether. Morality comes from Conscience, not pleasure. Few constrasts are steeper.

t's quite telling that your attempt to demean atheists is to liken us to your religion. We would lose what moral or intellectual high ground we had if we were merely practicing a religion, wouldn't we? But what does that say about your religion?

I don't think Cable is saying that atheists are bad because they have faith, just that they shouldn't hate it because they have it. And he would be right if he had replaced "atheist" with "materialist".

 

[Paschendale]

My Morality doesn't. You say that whatever causes us pain and suffering is evil, do you realize this is hedonism? (If so I bet you don't practice it, at least not completely). To define Morality in terms of pleasure seems to be to drop Morality altogether. Morality comes from Conscience, not pleasure. Few constrasts are steeper.

I didn't say pleasure. I said biology. Evolutionary biology, specifically. Our species survived the trials of natural selection by forming societies where people watch out for each other, protect each other, and respect each other. That the biological basis for human beings not hurting, torturing, killing, lying to, or stealing from each other. Pleasure is often our bodies' way of telling us that something is good. The thrills of love and sex are our bodies rewarding us for reproducing and forming family units, which made us survive better. The love we feel for friends and family is a biological attachment to keep us all together and alive. The pleasure we feel from our interactions with loved ones reinforces this biological push.

Hedonism? Hedonism isn't even really a thing, and it has no bearing on our discussion. Everything we call evil is acts that harm our neighbors. Acts that we do not wish performed upon us. Our conscience is the awareness that we are doing things that we would not wish done to us. Morality is our attempts to codify the communal survival instincts that evolution has instilled in us.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

We act out of dislike of religion being afforded special legal status, in clear violation of the constitution. We're certainly not jealous and would be more than happy to adopt a "live and let live" policy, if only the religious would do the same.

Yeah, a lot of these types of 'opposition atheists' just don't get it. It's a simple fact of not believing - it's not a matter of 'purging' the world of 'terrible' religions and their 'horrible' pedestal.

Simply because some have chosen to remove their-self doesn't extend to them the 'jerk' red carpet.

 

[Fiddytree]

Book plug time:

Without God, Without Creed: The Origins of Unbelief in America (New Studies in American Intellectual and Cultural History): James C. Turner: 9780801834073: Amazon.com: Books

For those interested in some "light" reading

 

[RGacky3]

This is a tired re-run of the abuse of definitions common to many religionist attacks, including that of the OP. It's all terribly simple but they complicate it so. For the umpteenth time, a theist believes in gods. An a-theist doesn't believe in gods. Not a disbelief, just a lack of a belief.
Supernaturalists seem to struggle with the concept that people can live their lives not believing as they do. They seem unable to conceptualise living a life without an invisible friend of some kind, and presume that those who do not share that belief must be deficient in some way. It get very old when the same old misrepresentations of my lack of a belief in gods are shoe-horned into THEIR worldview so they can make sense of it in their terms. The problem lies in their inability to grasp that their view is feet and inches to my centimetres and metres.
As has been said many times before,atheism is a religion like bald is a hair colour.
Likewise no faith is needed not to have a belief in a story. I don't say that to be insulting, but to underscore the fact that without a belief in gods, that's all they are. Stories, tales and myths. Some might contain a kernel of a great truth or morality lesson, some might not, but in the end they're just anecdotes.

That isn't true.

A-Theist, means NO GOD, meaning a belief that there IS no God.

I lack belief that there is intelligent life in Space, I don't believe there is NO intelligent life in Space, I dont' know, I'm agnostic about it, I lack belief, but there is a difference between that and saying there IS NO intelligent life out there.

an atheist believes there is no God .... an agnostic does not know, a lack of belief does not make an atheist in and of itself.

 

[Manc Skipper]

You presume to tell me what my beliefs are? How typical.

 

[RGacky3]

You presume to tell me what my beliefs are? How typical.

No I presume to use the term "atheist" consistantly and based on what it actually means.

 

[spud_meister]

I believe Atheism to be a secularist religion, in that it is a belief system with it's own customs, practices, and moral code.

So what are the shared beliefs of all atheists?

 

[Manc Skipper]

No I presume to use the term "atheist" consistantly and based on what it actually means.

You presume wrongly. What the prefix "a" actually means is "without", therefore: amoral; lacking morals. atonal; lacking a (musical) key. asystole; lacking a heartbeat. atheism; lacking a belief in gods..

 

[RGacky3]

You presume wrongly. What the prefix "a" actually means is "without", therefore: amoral; lacking morals. atonal; lacking a (musical) key. asystole; lacking a heartbeat. atheism; lacking a belief in gods..

Atheist, means belief that the Word is without a God.

the analogy I made Works, I don't believe there is an odd number of stars, I don't disbeieve it either, that isn't the same type disbeleif atheism is, atheism is the belief there is no God, when someone Calls themself an atheist that is what is understood.

 

[Cable]

Knowledge of nature, biology, the cosmos, history, and anthropology contradict the supposed teachings of your god. Science disproves it.

That would be pretty devastating to my beliefs. I haven't seen that proof. Can you point it out. Someone must have done a huge expose on this I would think. Considering the many scientists that believe in God, I have a difficult time buying your statement.

Our morality comes from our biology. The things we call evil are those that harm us, bring us fear and suffering. Those are directly related to our physical nature. Killing and harming people is evil. That is the morality for corporeal, temporal beings, not immortal or spiritual ones. We call cooperation and community good. That is because we evolved as social creatures. We benefit from working together with our tribe or family. It's not really subjective at all. There's no personal belief involved.

Strange that so many are out to kill and torture others then. This seems to indicate some scientific basis for your opinion being wrong.

Many religious beliefs do not deal with moral codes, and many moral codes do not deal with religion. Trying to draw false equivalencies gets you nowhere.

I have a pretty firm belief that ones own moral codes leads one to their own religious practices. One seems to follow the other. Whether these are formal or not is irrelevant.

It's quite telling that your attempt to demean atheists is to liken us to your religion. We would lose what moral or intellectual high ground we had if we were merely practicing a religion, wouldn't we? But what does that say about your religion?

I am just after the truth. If you find the truth demeaning then it is your issue, not mine. Perhaps you have no moral/intellectual high ground. Perhaps you are just following a belief the best you are able, and it is in part flawed. Pride is a human factor that is a personal issue. It affects us all, and is a hindrance to discovering the truth. Even science agrees with this.
You assume the moral/intellectual high ground, but in fact you do not have it. It is through deception, intended or not, that you even think you do. Many here will decry the evils done by way of religion, and totally ignore the evils done for political reasons, which have been equally devastating, if not more so, all throughout history.
Also, by your rational, one could easily argue that religion has played a very important role in preserving the human species. This would be an atheist view though, as a believer would not typically view spirituality as a product of evolution.

We act out of dislike of religion being afforded special legal status, in clear violation of the constitution. We're certainly not jealous and would be more than happy to adopt a "live and let live" policy, if only the religious would do the same.

This is really where we find the rub. If you must admit that your own opinions about life are your belief system, then we see you are no different than the catholic or protestant churches in that you also tend to champion laws and regulations that favor your belief system.
You cry loudly when believers seek to codify their beliefs, but have no qualms at all regarding your camp doing the same. This isn't live and let live, its more do as we say, not as we do. Hypocritical.

What evidence do you use to conclude the fact that Zeus (the supreme god who is greater than all other gods) isn't real?

This is too deep a topic for a simple reply. I will just say that Christ won me through his example. If he isn't what he said he is, then he is a liar of the worst sort and perpetrated great evil on the world. If he is what he said he is, then it is the best news we could ever hope for.

 

[iangb]

Atheist, means belief that the Word is without a God.

the analogy I made Works, I don't believe there is an odd number of stars, I don't disbeieve it either, that isn't the same type disbeleif atheism is, atheism is the belief there is no God, when someone Calls themself an atheist that is what is understood.

Etymologically speaking, if theism is 'the belief in a god' then a-theism can be either 'no beleif in a god' or 'belief in no god'.

Just because you use words in a particular way doesn't mean that everybody else uses them in the same way. Some people do, but not everyone does.

 

[RGacky3]

Etymologically speaking, if theism is 'the belief in a god' then a-theism can be either 'no beleif in a god' or 'belief in no god'.

Just because you use words in a particular way doesn't mean that everybody else uses them in the same way. Some people do, but not everyone does.

Agnostic means you don'nt know.

Atheist means you believe there is no God.

Again, the analogy of the number of stars fits, when someone Calls themself an atheist, they almost ALWAYs mean not agnostic, but atheist, i.e. they believe there is NO God.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Atheist, means belief that the Word is without a God.

the analogy I made Works, I don't believe there is an odd number of stars, I don't disbeieve it either, that isn't the same type disbeleif atheism is, atheism is the belief there is no God, when someone Calls themself an atheist that is what is understood.

A theist has a belief in a god or gods An a-theist has no such belief. He doesn't necessarily make the further jump to actively disbelieving, he simply has to not have the belief.

 

[RGacky3]

A theist has a belief in a god or gods An a-theist has no such belief. He doesn't necessarily make the further jump to actively disbelieving, he simply has to not have the belief.

That isn't how the terms are used.

Agnosticism is what you're talking about, a Word consistantly used as seperate from atheist, atheist meaning you believe there is no God, theist you believe there is and agnostic you don't know.

Withholding belief is agnostic, just as I am AGNOSTIC about whether or not there are an odd number of stars ... I'm not an a-oddnumberofstarsist, even though I don't have that belief, I'm agnostic about it, I don't know.

 

[Cable]

That isn't how the terms are used.

Agnosticism is what you're talking about, a Word consistantly used as seperate from atheist, atheist meaning you believe there is no God, theist you believe there is and agnostic you don't know.

Withholding belief is agnostic, just as I am AGNOSTIC about whether or not there are an odd number of stars ... I'm not an a-oddnumberofstarsist, even though I don't have that belief, I'm agnostic about it, I don't know.

In the context of this particular discussion I believe your definition is accurate.

 

[Arcana XV]

Shouldn't we all, believers and non-believers alike, be called agnostic? Neither group has any proof that their philosophy is correct.The default position, before anyone tries to indoctrinate us one way or the other, is purely agnostic. In the end, the only truth in this debate is that no one knows or can prove a damn thing either way.

 

[Cable]

Shouldn't we all, believers and non-believers alike, be called agnostic? Neither group has any proof that their philosophy is correct.The default position, before anyone tries to indoctrinate us one way or the other, is purely agnostic. In the end, the only truth in this debate is that no one knows or can prove a damn thing either way.

I get your point. But Belief is the thing. We don't know, but we believe in some way, something.
The significance of this belief commitment is illustrated well by Paul:
"If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied."

 

[Robbie Loucks]

That's all atheists. That is, people who are not theists. Theists believe. Atheists do not. That's not an "agnostic atheist". Those terms contradict. That's just the definition for atheists. Not having a theistic belief.

Come on, the religious spectrum isn't that black and white. Both agnostic atheism and gnostic atheism are things, y'know.

 

[Arcana XV]

I get your point. But Belief is the thing. We don't know, but we believe in some way, something.
The significance of this belief commitment is illustrated well by Paul:
"If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied."

Belief is not necessarily religious and does not necessarily lead to the establishment of a personal moral code. Lack of belief even more so. Morality is built on much more than metaphysical concepts. Life experience, cultural differences, gender, sexual orientation, age, social status, academic education, all play a part in our building a personal moral code, especially if we outright reject morality grounded in the religious beliefs of others. Even believers systematically pick and choose what they like out of their religion and discard what they don't like or what is clearly culturally outdated. The purists are a tiny minority, especially in our part of the world which so values individual freedom of thought.