Sounds like a good read. But to comment on the OP's comment, why is it I encounter far more evangelical atheists than religious people ? Is there just some super-weirdy selection effect that means they gravitate toward me while the religious nutters generally keep their distance ?
Originally shared by Ruth Mckay
""Believers talk about atheism as if it's a pathology of a particularly odd phase of modern western culture that will pass..." Yes. Yes, they do. It's the one thing I hate about the Internet - home grown evangelists; they're everywhere, patronising folk left, right and centre.
Rant over.
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/disbelieve-it-or-not-ancient-history-suggests-that-atheism-is-as-natural-to-humans-as-religion#sthash.9XXtxsd1.hpvt
"Most of the later Roman Empire’s ideological energy was expended fighting supposedly heretical beliefs – often other forms of Christianity."
ReplyDeleteWell duh. Heresy is by definition other forms of the same religion.
What I find a bit irritating, though, is how people continue to use the Atheist/Believer false dichotomy. Atheists, unlike Agnostics, are Believers (who believe in an absence - and that's OK too!) Which means that quite a few so-called Atheists of ancient times were in fact Agnostics. But then again, quite a few of today's Antitheists pretend to be Agnostics so maybe it evens out?
And I suspect the human mind is indeed wired to belief toward something greater than oneself (but also to not see one's own belief as such). Whether this belief is toward a God, a Way, Mother Nature, the State, an Absence or the profound Nature of Humankind, it may not be that different.
BupSahn Sunim You are probably aware of it, but this quote from Nietzsche may be one of the most misinterpreted ones in the history of philosophy :)
Arien Hellboy That's a remarkably simple explanation that had somehow never occurred to me before. Groups of any system of thought must contain some fraction of immature/stupid elements. I wonder if the Archbishop of Canterbury is sick to the teeth of Creationists forever proclaiming that they're objectively right and everyone else is wrong ?
ReplyDelete(unfortunately since atheism is currently under the thrall of Dawkins and other devout New Atheists, it's much harder to make a similar reverse analogy)
If you think there is no God, then you are the one of those most ignorant humans. If you think you don't need God, then you are the most ungrateful humans.
ReplyDeleteYou say we religious people don't think or reason or use logic but on the contrary it's you who dont think, reason and use logic. You never question yourselves and things around yourselves. You are so deluded that your ignorance has made you ignorant of your own ignorances.
Kashaf http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2015/01/the-unthinking-atheist.html
ReplyDeleteI agree that we are not hard wired to believe in god(s), but I do believe that we are wired to put the events that happen around us into some sort of context. Myths and religion do that.
ReplyDeleteWe are a species of makers, experts at manipulating our environment and enhancing our abilities through tools. We also have a natural tendency to anthropomorphize everything. It seems inevitable that a tribal culture of humans would attribute things they can't explain to supernatural humanoids.
Just as a point of clarity. Saying your an atheist is simply stating you don't believe in God. Anyone who claims to know, one way or the other, is delusional as the conjecture is irresolvable.
ReplyDeleteJust because people don't identify with the more evangelical atheists out there, doesn't change the definition of the word. If your answer to the question, "do you believe in a god?", is not, yes, then you are an atheist.
BupSahn Sunim I do like this term "apatheist". I learned a new word today. :) I think it would describe a surprisingly large fraction of the population.
ReplyDeleteMike Aben
ReplyDelete" Saying your an atheist is simply stating you don't believe in God. "
Well, this is my main bone of contention with many atheists. Ignoring terminology there are people who :
- Are certain of the existence of deities
- Believe in deities
- Lack belief in or against deities
- Believe deities do not exist
- Are certain deities do not exist
I think there is a fundamental difference between a true lack of a belief and an active belief either for or against something, therefore it's better to have terms that clearly label the difference. The closest existing definitions that fit are, in my view, agnostic for lacking belief, atheist for believing they don't exist, and antitheist for being certain they don't exist.
It just seems to me that a great many people, likely the majority, of people who loudly profess their atheism actively believe deities do not exist. Many are on a mission to convert people. If this was not the case, there would be no need for the separate agnostic/atheist terms and I'd be happy to be labelled as an atheist.
But much more importantly, I have to think of a shiny visual in order to get BupSahn Sunim to renounce his dark matter apatheism...
BupSahn Sunim But isn't apatheism really just a description of level of interest ? For example, I am certain that Lithuania exists, but I have absolutely no interest in it. If someone who is certain deities exist is a fanatic, then I suppose that would make me a fanatical apatheistic Lithuanian...
ReplyDeleteBupSahn Sunim Rhys Taylor I hear what you're saying, but the word Christian hardly provides any delineation either. Being a Christian doesn't imply being a young earth creationist, neither should being an atheist imply being an anti-theist.
ReplyDeleteI would certainly identify myself as an apatheist as you've defined it. Personally, the question just isn't very important, except that in many countries it's shockingly important. When Americans are polled on whether they would vote for an atheist, the large majority say no, behind every other group listed in the poll. The evangelical right carry an incredible amount of political clout and are having a negative effect on policies like health care and education.
What bothers me about saying I'm not an atheist if asked is that it feels like apologizing. Just as the vast majority of theists are rational, considerate people, most atheists are too. Unfortunately, both groups get painted by a militant majority minority.
BupSahn Sunim A very interesting response !
ReplyDelete"and so unless you have an unusual and extreme obsession about the existence of Baltic countries then you are probably not classed as fanatical. "
Well dammit, there goes my plan to roam the streets with a placard shouting loudly that salvation only comes through acknowledging the existence and One True Way of the Baltics...
" However, it's not extremists who are the problem.."
Good point ! One can be absolutely convinced about something and not be a jerk or a terrorist about it. Being an extremist may be a necessary but not sufficient condition for being violent, e.g. I see no reason to beat people who refuse to accept the Great Lithuanian Truth. Extremism isn't the problem, hatred is. And also stupidity, which is arguably more dangerous.
All that said, I do think the definitions of "fan" and "fanatic" have somewhat diverged in modern use.