jump to last post 1-24 of 24 discussions (121 posts)

An atheist society?

  1. kirstenblog profile image76
    kirstenblogposted 6 years ago

    I was reading a different thread that got me thinking about the history or religion and that it goes far back into history with many incarnations in different societies. Atheism on the other hand does not seem to have such a strong presence in history. As I understand the societies of say my ancestors is one of religious rule, denial of the local religion could be deadly. My thinking is as to what kind of influence can/will happen in society over time with a strong atheist presence? We can see clearly through out history examples of the oppression and exploitation of religion on societies from the spanish inquisition (no one expects the spanish inquisition!) to the crusades. What kind of society is bring painted for the future now with more and more freedom to NOT believe in any one religion (or none at all)? I would love to read your thoughts about this smile

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Kirsten, (great name btw) in answer to your question, I do not see atheism reaching the level of social takeover. It is a very needy child. It needs science and/or religion to sustain itself. If it attempts to 'evolve' into philo or critique thinking, it would dismiss itself in a hurry.

      But like all creatures, it will adapt and do whatever means is necessary to survive, even to the point of destroying itself if it cannot -which is what is happening in religion and science already.

      1. kirstenblog profile image76
        kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Should prove an interesting natural experiment wink

        1. 0
          Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          indeed.
          like all systems, and the sun, once they run out of hot air, they fight to stay alive. To the point of collapsing in on themselves and then exploding -leaving a dense, massive 'hole' in their place.

    2. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      "Atheism" and "god" are imagined concepts.
      They only exist in the minds of highly imaginative and ignorant human bings.
      The term "atheism" is a word described as; to deny a belief in god/s.
      God is but a word created to define an imagined supernatural divinity.
      This god thing is not an "actuality," thus one cannot deny or accept the existence of that which is not an "actuality."
      One can only accept or deny a personal "concept" of the word god.
      Man exists as an incipient, fearfilled, infant creature.

    3. 0
      cosetteposted 6 years ago in reply to this




      even though i don't attend church, i wouldn't like living in a world without churches. i would rather have a church on my street corner than a gas station. religion brings a lot of hope and comfort to a lot of people without hope or comfort. i would also not like to live in a world where images and structures like this were absent:

      http://i44.tinypic.com/2jalymb.jpg


      http://i42.tinypic.com/2heakqq.jpg


      i have a big bible in my library. i mean this thing is huge. it's got things in it like flowers from deceased loved ones, funeral announcements, that sort of thing. it is illustrated and has gilded pages. i like looking at it sometimes...

      1. Mark Knowles profile image61
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So - you wouldn't prevent the child abuse and past horrors if you could at the cost of a few pieces of art?

        http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee303/atezcan/album%20name/Home%20and%20views%20from%20home/Fira%20i%20Festes/victimofinquisition.jpg

      2. Shadesbreath profile image88
        Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Bouguereau is one of my all time favorite painters. This degree of artistry is not seen anymore.  Or so rarely as to be lost in the sea of crap. GREAT pull.

    4. 69
      paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hi friend kirstenblog

      The Atheist could never in the past form a positive role in the human society nor they are capable of forming one; whenever in the world they got hold of a rule in any part of the world, they miserably failed. They were so cruel that they were ashamed to own it.

      They are skeptics or people of confusion and doubts; which can never result into an organized system.

      They are mostly mediocres people and follow blindly the Atheism meme. Science was evolved by joint efforts of people with religions and without religions; the Atheists Agnostics Humanits Skeptics pretend as if Science is their product only.

      Thanks

      I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

      1. 0
        cosetteposted 6 years ago in reply to this




        actually, that isn't true. i have seen many 'non-believers' on this site and in real life who are well aware of and acknowledge the contributions to Science by great minds and thinkers who were religious and non-religious.

      2. skyfire profile image72
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Really ?

        Carl sagan was cruel ? feyman was cruel ? weinberg ? Daniel Dennett ? Warren Buffet ?

        Talk about positive role and progress, Lol.

        No wonder islamics think like this.

        Osama, zakir naik, harun yahya must be the most worthy for this planet eh ?

        1. shazwellyn profile image84
          shazwellynposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Crucify me!  Nine inch nail me! *wink*

          1. skyfire profile image72
            skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            big_smile Hi shaz..

            1. shazwellyn profile image84
              shazwellynposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I was just thinking about you and then... you came! LOL

              1. shazwellyn profile image84
                shazwellynposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                here lol

    5. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I would love to live long enuf to see a gov't in power that has gained enuf "sophistication" to consider this god thing to be the fairytale character it is.
      An "educated" gov't that would be dedicated to maximizing the viablity of the human species.
      A gov't that would consider that theism and atheism was just a "fad" that was finally "deleted" by universal education and thoughtful, well planned genetic engineering.

      1. aguasilver profile image87
        aguasilverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "universal education and thoughtful, well planned genetic engineering."

        What a nightmarish thought.

        I would like to see a government who realised that they served the people and sought to reduce 'governance' to the barest minimum to retain social order.

        I'm unconcerned about religion having any say in government, unless they stood as a 'Theocracy' party and won the election.

        Even then, should they do that, they (Theocrats) would be scripturally restricted to allowing secular members of the society to live free from any biblical constraints, should they choose to do so.

        God needs no politicians, He controls the whole shooting match and allows us mediocre politicians because, like the Israelites we choose to have 'kings', rather than Him governing us.

        John

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          This retort portrays the writer as having little or no understanding of the "nature" of man. tsk tsk

      2. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well said! Day to day and certainly during parliamentary debate Australian politics is pretty robust.

        It amazes me that we still open Parliament with the lords prayer.

        It sounds bloody hilariously out of place with what is conducted  in the daily cut and thrust on the floor in Parliament! smile

    6. 0
      sandra rinckposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Atheist have always been apart of society the only difference is they wouldn't have known it then because they would be hanged or something for their disbelief.

    7. Sab Oh profile image60
      Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      And what has historically happened when atheism was enforced the way that religion was/is in some places?

      Oppression, loss of freedom, deaths of millions.


      Believe or don't believe what you want but don't overdo it. Many of the atheists who shout the loudest around here are every bit as intolerant and fanatical as any other kind of religious zealot.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image61
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Aww, TK Sensei - no one said anything about "enforcing" atheism. How odd that you would bring that in to the discussion. Almost as though you were antagonizing some one intentionally.

        1. Sab Oh profile image60
          Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Speak of the devil...

  2. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
    Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago

    Since Atheism is a religion I think the point is can we have a society that doesn't have ties to the long held religions like Christianity, Judaism, and Muslim-ism. I think the fact is people will not ever know everything, so there will always be something that we will have to take on faith(belief without proof) and that means religion.

    Belief system:
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
    -a life stance
    -a religion.
    -a world view
    -a philosophy.
    -an ideology

    The definition of a Religion:
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
    A religion is any systematic approach to living that involves beliefs about one's origins, one's place in the world, or a responsibility to live and act in the world in particular ways.

    From Dictionary.com:

    re⋅li⋅gion  [ri-lij-uhn]

    –noun

    1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

    2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

    3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

    4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

    5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

    6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

    Based on these definitions Atheism is a Religion.

    (Taken from my hub Atheism the religion of Don't believe)

    So the phenomenon you are talking about is really just the same old thing, different name.  IMHO

    1. 0
      Dog On A Missionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Its not a religion because it doesn't require any faith.

      Isn't faith the absolute corner stone of all religions?

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        so you can prove that there is no God?

        Or you believe that there is no God based on... Faith?

  3. kirstenblog profile image76
    kirstenblogposted 6 years ago

    Mikel, my response would be another question. My question is if what you say, that atheism is a religion, is accurate then what of those who reject religion? I mean how does one escape religion if every sand point is considered a religion?

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Proof.

      Knowing everything about everything. Until we Know everything and have proof to back up the knowledge there will always be unprovable beliefs, which mean religious beliefs, about that which cannot be proven.

      Hating what most people consider religion (Christianity for example) makes Atheism being a religion just like Christianity hard to swallow, but it is just from opposite ends.

      One says without proof there is no God and the other says without proof there is a God. 50/50 chance either way.

      I didn't create the definition of the word/concept 'religion'. It is what it is, even if someone doesn't like it.

      1. Pandoras Box profile image83
        Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You're confusing faith with religion in your definition. Having faith in something -the theories supported by physical evidence in this case- does not mean you are religious. Having faith in your spouse's fidelity does not mean that you have a religion about it or that your faith means a set of beliefs about the world around you.

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
          Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Not MY definitions...

          Belief system:
          From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
          -a life stance
          -a religion.
          -a world view
          -a philosophy.
          -an ideology

          The definition of a Religion:
          From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
          A religion is any systematic approach to living that involves beliefs about one's origins, one's place in the world, or a responsibility to live and act in the world in particular ways.

          From Dictionary.com:

          re⋅li⋅gion  [ri-lij-uhn]

          –noun

          1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

          2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

          3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

          4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

          5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

          6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

          1. 0
            Pani Midnyte Odinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Atheism is not a religion or a faith.

            Atheism, by definition, is the absence of theism. If you cannot say "I believe in a Deity/God/Supreme Being" then you are an atheist. If you are not a theist, then you are  an atheist.

            There is a subtle but important difference between "believing there is no God", and "not believing there is a God". The first is a belief, the second is a lack of that belief. I don't know any atheists who "believe" God (take your pick, there are plenty) does not exist. All the atheists I know simply do not believe God does exist.

            If someone asked you about unicorns, would you say "I believe  there are no unicorns", or would it be more honest to say "I do not believe in unicorns"? These are two different answers. Nobody disbelieves in unicorns purely as a matter of personal faith.

            -Selected Quotes from http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism … igion.html

            1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
              Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this



              I would have written it like this:

              Definitions of Atheism:
              -the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
              -a belief in the non-existence of God or gods.

              1. 0
                Pani Midnyte Odinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Eh, I edited it. Found a better explained thingy. lol

              2. pay2cEM profile image90
                pay2cEMposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I think it was beneficial to highlight the 2 different distinct forms "atheism" takes.

                1. A belief that no deity exists (Active)

                2. Without belief in any deity (Passive)

                Atheists themselves label these positions as "strong atheism" or "weak atheism," respectively. The 1st form could very well be argued to be a religion of sorts, as it contains a clear proclamation of a belief about deities: that there are none.

                However, regardless of what this or that dictionary says, you can't legitimately justify cramming everyone who harbors a specific, active disbelief in something into a single group or religion. That's like saying that everyone who believes there's no such thing as Bigfoot belongs to the "religion" of non-Bigfootism. That's just silly.

                The weak atheist position is a little harder to categorize because it falls somewhere in between active atheism and agnosticism. However, agnostics openly admit they don't know whether or not any deities exist, while "weak atheists" simply don't even bother thinking about the whole mess. To lump them into the same category seems to be a matter of laziness or ignorance on the part of whomever is doing the lumping.

                We have a word for people who go to Star Trek conventions. They're called "Trekkies." But no one bothers to come up with an all-encompasing word or description for non-Trekkies, because what would be the point? I personally am not a Trekkie, but I'm also not interested in forming a belief system with any other random person who also happens to be a non-Trekkie. What, are we gonna have a non-Trekkie convention? Where everyone shows up in normal clothes and only talks about non-Trek-related topics? That is basically the same scenario religious people are facing when they try to label atheism a religion and lump everyone who might remotely fit the bill into pot.

                Part of belonging to a belief system/religion is SHARING most or all of the same beliefs with the rest of the group. Simply not bothering to hold a belief of any sort about some particular thing doesn't really a religion make.

                1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                  Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this



                  Very, very Well Stated

                  I think this is the difference between the atheist religion and a lack of belief as well...

                  Passive is simply no belief.

                  Active is decisive, a decision has been made, and action taken. That action makes it a belief-system and a religion.

                  {passive non-believers in a no-bigfoot-ism would not be lumped into anything, but 'active' dis-believers would be, especially if they actively sought to convert others who did believe in Bigfoot, to a stance of non-belief. Kudos}

                2. Shadesbreath profile image88
                  Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Very nicely done.  I was actually contemplating getting out a bunch of my anthropology and theology books and putting together a hub to explain the differences, but your post cuts the chase and hopefully will quell the spasms that occur when someone points out the religious nature of dogmatic atheism.

                  I hoist this cold Coors Light at you, sir.
                  http://s4.hubimg.com/u/1569431_f260.jpg

                  1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                    Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    and I second the toast and the nicely stated.

                  2. Mark Knowles profile image61
                    Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah - see - that is the crux right there. "religious nature of" and "Is a religion" are two entirely different things.

                    Mikel (and a bunch of other theists on the defensive) - in his transparent attempt to justify his ridiculous beliefs (Look Ma! Atheists don't believe in God! That is the same as believing in God 'cause they can't prove He isn't really there! See? I am not crazy after all!) has effectively rendered entire swathes of the English vocabulary meaningless.

                    Religion = any one who expresses an opinion on anything. Hmmm MADD, Dentists, Politicians, all sorts of - well no actually - everyone is now a religionist.

                    We already lost probabilities and any number of previously-useful words.

                    Infinity:1 = 50/50 chance
                    Proof = anything I say
                    Evidence = a voice in my head

                    This makes it very difficult to communicate with people who use new meanings of words for things without telling any one, so now we are going to need two more words to differentiate between believers and atheists.

                    Any time Mikel. wink

                    As I have attempted to explain in many occasions, I am not speaking to the people it appears I am speaking to. There is only one way to cauterize the abomination of religion, and constant, long term ridicule is that way. England is - as always - way ahead. we have been making fun of religion for some time now and it is waning in power. I do find it funny that the Muslims think this is an attack on Christianity. lol

                    Oh and Mikel - Great job on derailing the thread to show that believing in God is exactly the same as not believing in God. LOLOLOL

                    50/50 chance right? Each one just as likely as the other? No delusions here. lol lol

                    Dear me.

                  3. 0
                    china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Then you go and spoil a really good argument by putting up a pic of Coors light - nobody believes you really drink that stuff ! big_smile

          2. Pandoras Box profile image83
            Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            None of these definitions of religion apply to atheism. Not one of them. Sorry.

            1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
              Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Belief system:
              From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
              -a life stance
              -a religion.
              -a world view
              -a philosophy.
              -an ideology

              The definition of a Religion:

              A religion is any systematic approach to living that involves beliefs about one's origins, one's place in the world, or a responsibility to live and act in the world in particular ways.

              1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

              2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons

              6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

              1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Does not apply.



                Does not apply.


                Does not apply.



                Does not apply, except in a few cases.

                1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                  Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  tongue

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                    Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    No - it doesn't Mikel. You keep saying it does is not going to change that. Sorry. I know what I think and you telling me what I think is not going to change that. I know - historically - this is how it worked for you religionists - but - times are changing.

                  2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Who could argue with that?  wink

      2. jdbrown426 profile image61
        jdbrown426posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Religion isn't something that can be proven with any physical substance. It is a belief. It is a way of thinking. It is a spiritual understanding of what the individual believes to be true in his or her own life. You cannot prove something like that with the physical.

        1. 0
          Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          { makes the scooby-doo voice} really? If you say so.

    2. KeithTax profile image79
      KeithTaxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Atheism is the lack of religion.

      An atheist does not believe any god exists; religion believes in a god or gods.

      Ergo, atheism has no god or gods and without a god is not a religion.

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Not according to the dictionaries and encyclopedias.

        But I didn't write them, and you're definition isn't in there. Even if that is what you wish the words/concepts meant, the fact is they don't.

        1. kirstenblog profile image76
          kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ok same dictionary as previous, oxford american dictionary application. The definition it gives for the word religion conflicts with your wikipida definition of atheism as a religion.

          religion |riˈlijən|
          noun
          the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods : ideas about the relationship between science and religion.
          • details of belief as taught or discussed : when the school first opened they taught only religion, Italian, and mathematics.
          • a particular system of faith and worship : the world's great religions.
          • a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance : consumerism is the new religion.


          Atheism does not have a belief in and worship of any super human supreme importance concept. I personally do have a belief in a super human concept that lacks accompanying beliefs as to its nature, desires, or intentions (or lack there of). I just have 'feelings' as to a presence thats it smile

  4. wyanjen profile image88
    wyanjenposted 6 years ago

    big_smile yes!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gldlyTjXk9A

    Mikel, you make a strong argument that atheism is a religion, but it is not.
    The definition of a Religion:
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
    A religion is any systematic approach to living that involves beliefs about one's origins, one's place in the world, or a responsibility to live and act in the world in particular ways.

    None of this is inherent to atheism.

    However: many (most) atheists fall into the category of Humanism. Secular Humanism is very much a religion and it fits the definition here perfectly. You have to be an atheist to be a sec. humanist, but you don't have to be a humanist to be an atheist.
    smile

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You should read my hub. Simply stating "It isn't" does not make you correct. The facts and the definitions of the words/concepts say it is.

    2. Pandoras Box profile image83
      Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Right. Jen said it. Atheism is not a religion. The only thing atheists can be expected to agree on is their viewpoint regarding belief in gods and that's it.

      How they view the world, creation, religion, government, society, economy, their fellow man, morals, duties, sexual preferences and ideas about people's purpose of life all vary.

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Pannie you have perfectly described the beliefs of the Theists in all the modern churches. (including Atheism.)

    3. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      moral living -not morality as in laws of good/bad- IS a system.
      All things are a system from Solar systems to anarchy.
      Some take on a variable optic/object or many in some cases.

      In the case of atheism, a system must exist else the concept is null and void, no perception of it.
      It has rules, approach, ideology, considerations and dismissals, boundaries -great or small.

      Also, without theism, atheism would not exist. So is atheism actually an offspring or 'supported system'  of the Ism? Does it actual assist in supporting theism itself?
      I would say have to say yes.
      Course my argument is all human consciousness & awareness is that Ism.

  5. thooghun profile image86
    thooghunposted 6 years ago

    I'm sorry Mikel, but your own quotes disagree with you.

    "when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances"

    This new society that kirsten envisions is one free of any superhuman influence. It would be one where culpability would be an individual's alone.

    "A religion is any systematic approach to living that involves beliefs about one's origins, one's place in the world, or a responsibility to live and act in the world in particular ways."

    The point is that an atheist does not have a position, by definition and does not have a systematic approach simply because they will either formulate their own ideas or accept that they will not always know everything.

    While it is impossible to understand, today, what a religion-free society would look like, a look at Scandinavian countries, whose population are almost entirely atheist and among the richest and most stable countries in the world, and understand that a religious-free society is both possible and very stable (without breakdowns of any kind).

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Religion may also include those parts of religion that are made up of people that believe in a supernatural being, but that does not mean that groups of people that have a system of belief that includes a belief in the NON-existence of a supernatural being are not also religious.

      Just because some scientists don't believe a given scientific theory is correct, doesn't make the theory not a part of science.

      The bottom line is Religion is not just/only a religion IF there is a belief in a supernatural being. It includes any belief described in the afore stated definitions, even if Atheists don't want it to.

      1. kephrira profile image62
        kephriraposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The absence of belief is not itself a belief Mikel. You seem to be saying that atheism is a religion because it is a 'systematic approach to living that involves beliefs about one's origins, one's place in the world, or a responsibility to live and act in the world in particular ways' - but atheism is none of those things - it is defined as the absence of such beliefs.

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
          Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this



          I've said this before....

          A belief, that there is no God....is a belief.

          Atheism is defined by the belief that there is no God.

          1. wyanjen profile image88
            wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            no no...

            atheism is not a belief that there is no god.
            atheism is no belief at all.

            The distinction is: I believe there is no god
            versus: I do not believe at all

            If you equate belief with action, than believing there is no god is taking action whereas not believing is not taking action

  6. kirstenblog profile image76
    kirstenblogposted 6 years ago

    I have to ask, is wikipida a good place to go for definitions of complex word concepts? yikes tongue

    1. 0
      Pani Midnyte Odinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Wikipedia really isn't a good place to go for the definition of anything, considering anyone is allowed to edit it.

  7. kirstenblog profile image76
    kirstenblogposted 6 years ago

    Ok so marvin on my computer dock defines an atheist as
    atheism |ˈāθēˌizəm|
    noun
    the theory or belief that God does not exist.

    No more no less

    By the way marvin on my dock is the oxford american dictionaries app smile

  8. 0
    Madame Xposted 6 years ago

    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4002/4457183891_0a1d9a4f54_o.jpg

    1. kirstenblog profile image76
      kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Ok thats funny as H E double hockey sticks! tongue lol

      1. Pandoras Box profile image83
        Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It is funny. It isn't quite accurate, but it's funny.



        (Shhhh. Don't tell anyone I said so.)

        1. kirstenblog profile image76
          kirstenblogposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I wont tell if you don't wink big_smile

        2. wyanjen profile image88
          wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          (Don't tell anybody that I laughed too)

  9. Pandoras Box profile image83
    Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago

    I think that two things are lacking in order to move forward without too much religious belief, or rather, with everyone understanding the nature of religious beliefs, and religious beliefs kept in their appropriate places (ie. out of government).

    The first thing lacking is a broad enough education that informed on the origins and nature of god-beliefs and also stayed focused on developing problem solving skills. In short, we need a more well-informed public.

    The second thing is we need to evolve carefully new ways -or perhaps old ways- to fill the needs in our society that have been filled by religions.

    I think that a society of people who see each other more clearly without the blinders of religion or the excuses of god will naturally get along better and be more productive in achieving the human goals relevant to us all.

  10. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
    Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago

    The way the 'Atheists', on this site, work together to spread their 'doctrine' and convert those who believe in a supreme being to their own beliefs of the non-existence of that supreme being is Identical to the conversion practices of the people that believe a God exists.

  11. kirstenblog profile image76
    kirstenblogposted 6 years ago

    Maybe this should be a 'is atheism a religion?' thread! lol tongue

    1. Pandoras Box profile image83
      Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Every thread Mikel is on turns out to be a is-atheism-a-religion thread sooner or later.

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        are you calling me a trouble maker?  hmm

        and for the record, in the Illegal Immigration thread I never once mentioned atheism.   wink

        1. Pandoras Box profile image83
          Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          No, just tenacious.

  12. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    Critical Thinking dictates otherwise. For everything is apart of everything else.
    So atheism cannot -logically/consciously- separate itself from anything.
    It can perceive itself differently, present itself from any and all perspectives, objects.

    Ironically, atheism and religion are within the "Occupied Territory" called consciousness.

  13. Shadesbreath profile image88
    Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago

    Atheism is quite "present" in history.  The public declaration of it is largely absent during long stretches of time (based on who was in power and the prudence dictated thereby), but the lack of belief is not.  The argument was in full swing when Zeus and his homies on Olympus were the deities of the day, and the points on both sides were exactly the same then as now.  We've gotten nowhere on this debate in 2500 years.

    The problem is in the nature of man, not in the nature or name of the current god or gods.

  14. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    still, society cannot sustain itself without a order of systematic approach because it is ever conscious & aware of its necessity, ability to be and do. It is not an absolute. Thus making it yet another system of control under the guise of 'freedom of control' (self-ism). Which looking at it without bias, would appear a global segregation, each one having only themselves, being themselves and answering only to self.

    If atheism is the solution -apart from the microscopic consideration of 'moral consciousness', how does it provide a totality for ALL humans in all places. Is it willing to concede itself for the sake of the betterment of ALL humanity -even those of the opposition/condition - to show those 'failures' the way?
    How will it approach economics, nature, governing laws, etc?

    These are all elements of the human condition -despite religion or science. I really would like to read the atheist approach to this -without the Dawkins 'buy my tee-shirt online and save humanity' injection.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image61
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      How about we approach the entire problem without resorting to esoteric knowledge?

      That is all - build s society without an invisible super being to answer to in the next life. Atheism alone is clearly not a solution because that is merely an absence of belief in a god.

      So - why not build a social structure without that crutch? It has failed miserably and causes nothing but conflict.


      <snipped links>

      1. 0
        Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah, i agree about the removal the Ism -on both sides.
        both would have to go, since they need/sustain each other in many points.

        So, if "anti the Ism" is appied, the removal of it, would propagate social implosion.
        All laws would be removed and rewritten according to - ?
        All governments removed and replaced with - ?
        All economics removed.

        All these things would be replaced with what? A system that has no system or a system of such individuality that no one human would care for another. By nature, humans are selfish. I don't see how a new or improved segregation would help. Wouldn't that be completely the opposite. Total abandonment of anything except to satisfy individual desire.

        Not being coy, I like John Lennon's imagine too, but it cannot work in human society. We would be talking global genocide -to rid humanity of those selfish humans and the propaganda of the Ism. That is what I would call insane and would make all the 'cruel' leaders of history on all sides look like good school boys.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image61
          Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ah well - th utopia I desire will take more than just removing the government Inc - which controls all the other Incs you mentioned.

          Maybe that is what it will take - to rebuild from the ashes the -isms seem to desire so much.? wink

  15. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    PS, Mark -before I jet for the day,

    how would the human race -presently 7 billion strong and growing- resolve to the point of atheism. Only 1 million + are claiming public atheism. Even giving it 5 million wouldn't put a dent in the other 6.5 billion -and growing. That's a lot of bodies and a lot of pent up selfishness. Even taking 'god' out of the equation, because honestly, most people only 'know' of 'god' on Sunday.

    Have a good afternoon folks.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image61
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It is not a question of knowing god. The billions that suckle at the teat of easy peasy answers and assurances of a better life are not the real problem. big_smile

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hi Mark:
        Gotta define this god thing before ya can even consider it ...forget about believing or not believing in it...:-)

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
          Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Do you believe you are conscious Qwark?

          1. qwark profile image60
            qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Mikel:
            Conscious..???
            Lets play with the word.
            Conscious...hmmm..am I aware of self?
            Golly, What can I say? I can only "imagine" I am.
            If I can "imagine" I am, I can also imagine what a god thing is.
            So maybe I'm just a "concept?"
            Conscious? hmmmm...such a nebulous characteristic!
            Mikel, golly, I think I am, but I may be just "be" the result of a serendipitous cosmic joke...I don't know.
            Can you shed some light on the question you ask and the import of it in ref to my comment about this god thing?
            Much appreciated...:-)

  16. 0
    cosetteposted 6 years ago

    if i could of course i would. come on Mark....

    but i can still appreciate the beauty of religious art. i always have and i always will.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image61
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So can I. But - I would give it up for a world without child sex abuse by the clergy and witch burnings.

      But - you wouldn't.

      1. 0
        cosetteposted 6 years ago in reply to this




        oh boy smile

        how funny.

        look, i didn't say that...you did, just now. let's backtrack for a sec. you said:

        "So - you wouldn't prevent the child abuse and past horrors if you could at the cost of a few pieces of art?"

        i took that to mean that appreciating religious art doesn't negate all of the horrible things inflicted upon so many innocents in the name of religion. period.

        so to be very clear, would i trade all of the religious art and architecure in the world past, present and future for all of the lives lost and suffering endured?

        YES.

        i hope this clears that up.

        p.s. please don't put words out there that do not reflect what is in my heart or in my head, 'k?

        1. Mark Knowles profile image61
          Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You said - you wouldn't like living in a world without churches.

          There is a cost to that. That is all I am saying. I am not suggesting we knock down all the churches and burn all the art. Just that you acknowledge the cost in terms of child sexual abuse and murders. Sure - the church produced all the art. Why? Because they had all the money and power.

          So - what is your point exactly? I got the impression that you felt the benefits that we get outweigh all the bad things - which seems to be what most believers argue.

          What is in your heart or your head? Yay - we have pretty churches. Doesn't matter how destructive that was - now they are pretty? wink

  17. 0
    cosetteposted 6 years ago

    thanks! awesome hmm?

    1. Shadesbreath profile image88
      Shadesbreathposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I have this one in a big print in our formal dining room: http://www.goodart.org/wbnymn.jpg

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Bewbies!!!  big_smile


        He is a great artist.

  18. 0
    cosetteposted 6 years ago

    is this the part where i am supposed to quake in my boots?

    i'll try to give it a good show. roll

    no that was not my point at all. i was just reflecting on what a world would be like without religion, and i thought about art and i can't believe i now have to justify that to you.

    hee hee this would make me mad if it wasn't so funny.

    i think it is clear from anyone who reads my hubs what i am about and what i find horrible, so i'm not going to spend any energies trying to explain myself in this post. i said what i had to say and if you still need to pick it apart well i can't help that.

    besides, i have stuff to do now, even though it will appear as if i am running away that is not the case but then again i can't help your thinking that either and then i would feel compelled to explain that as well and 'round and 'round we go, so what were we talking about again?

    :)ciaoooo.....................

    1. Mark Knowles profile image61
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      ciao

  19. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    Sky fairies out of Government! lol

  20. Journey2244 profile image61
    Journey2244posted 6 years ago

    Please tell us what does apply to atheism? I am just curious, because it does not make sense. What is the REAL logic behind it - atheism?

    1. wyanjen profile image88
      wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Atheism is not a religion. It's not a belief, a philosophy, or a lifestyle.

      Atheism is lack of belief. It is not any more complicated than that.
      smile

      1. 0
        china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I don't believe that.

      2. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Exactly! smile

      3. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Nicely stated.


        lack of belief in?

        1. wyanjen profile image88
          wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          theism is belief in the existence of a god or gods

          a theism is no belief.

          Believing that there is no god, or denying the existence, would be anti theism.

          smile

          1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
            Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            so what is Atheism?

            a lack of belief...in/of?

            (and actually a theism is a belief in a supreme being.)
            {take your time I'm not going anywhere...}

            no belief... so you neither belief in the existence of or the non-existence of? (isn't that Agnostic?)

            1. 0
              Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              It's kinda like

              -Amoral
              -Asexual
              -Asymmetrical

              an absence of

              1. earnestshub profile image87
                earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, an absence of belief in the biggest pile of hogwash assembled in to a book! smile

              2. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                hence Atheist...

                1. 0
                  Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  lol. spot on Mikel.

                  they still do not get it.
                  -1 0 1, is still one.

                  a theist is any one or collective persons who consider or dismiss by the elements of a condition those definitions, rules, engagements and fundamental properties that make up a system of thoughts, exercises and believes of that condition, generally leaning to the romantic side of Duality -religion. Theism (The Ism) is both sides of the house, just pretending to dismiss the other for the sake of argument only.

                  an atheist is still a theist: pro, neutral, against (parallel) the assumed view of the core condition/ideology; an anti-theist is still a type of theist, needing the core ideology to even exist.

                  It is apart of 'the Ism' and its elements, yet does -continuously- express it is not. Parody? jeje.

              3. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                absence is not without, only lacking.

                a moral, a lack of moral, but still a type of moral
                a sexual, a lack of sexuality, but still a type of sexual

                etc, etc.

                take consciousness; thought.
                the lack of thought does not negate thought, or the non-existence of thought, only that it is lacking awareness or active thought, participating members of that classification.

            2. wyanjen profile image88
              wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              no belief = no belief
              period. smile

              I think you are reading too much into this...
              how is belief in a supreme being different than belief in a god or gods?

              gnostic means knowing, as in possessing spiritual knowledge.
              agnostic means not knowing

              agnostics believe that it is not possible to know whether a god exists. they don't discount it, but they don't claim it is there either.
              Think of agnostics as sitting on the fence.

              I'm not on the fence. I have no belief.

    2. 0
      china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Atheism isn't anything - it is just being sensible enough NOT to believe in the delusions of others.

      1. Sab Oh profile image60
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Wrong.

    3. 69
      paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hi friend

      Atheism is confusion and doubt only; with no real logic. The reason is the backbone of Atheism but you would see that they would start deriding and ridiculing the Religions which would indicate that their backbone has been broken or they have been left with no reason with them. They are just a lump of flesh withou backbone; they can't stand upright.

      Thanks

      I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

      1. Beelzedad profile image60
        Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Wow, for a peaceful Muslim, you sure like to start wars.

  21. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    It's not a belief, it is a withholding of credulity. lol
    Not believing in the bible or quoran is just that.
    I don't buy into little red riding hood either! lol

  22. 69
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    Paarsurrey wrote:”Science was evolved by joint efforts of people with religions and without religions; the Atheists Agnostics Humanist Skeptics pretend as if Science is their product only”

    cosette wrote:” i have seen many 'non-believers' on this site and in real life who are well aware of and acknowledge the contributions to Science by great minds and thinkers who were religious and non-religious.”

    Hi friends

    So our friend Cosette agree with me that Science is a joint effort of the Theists and the Atheists. It is wrong of the Atheists to pretend that Science is their lone product.

    Thanks

    I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

  23. skyfire profile image72
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    Lol, any proof or just love making sweeping statement Mr Troll ?

  24. 69
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    "china man wrote:
    Atheism isn't anything - it is just being sensible enough NOT to believe in the delusions of others"

    Hi friend

    I agree with you.

    Thanks

    I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

 
working