Not trying to be glib. I just read an interesting commencement address made by the late David Foster Wallace (Infinite Jest) and was struck by this excerpt:
Thoughts? (The entire address is worth reading, if you have the chance)
Atheists, by definition, do not worship anyone or anything. They have no religion. However, if you must give them something to "worship," I suppose they worship the things they can see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears. Atheists tend to side with the side of logic and evidence.
Nooooooo! They only side with their backside!
I disagree enough that I wrote a hub on it... I think Atheism is a religion.
I agree with you. Atheists hold on just as hard to their beliefs as someone in any religion
Balderdash! Not believing in the sky fairy is not a religion.
Just a bunch of people with common sense.
I didn't say it was a religion. I said atheists hold onto their view just as hard as those who follow a religion.
The difference is, though, Madame X, that atheists can explain their view through logic and facts,and aren't afraid to open up their reasoning to scrutiny. When you can do that, there's a solid reason for sticking to your view. Many fundamentalist Christians hold rigidly to their view and won't open their reasoning to scrutiny at all.
No. Atheism is not a religion.
We atheists have difference of opinion among ourselves on many points and prefer to have lone-wolf life. Weak-atheists are usually leaving religion/theism with some anger do form groups and religion, for example RAELions.
"Calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color." - Don Hirschberg
The man has it right! There are no atheists.
Atheism simply defined is just this: "..to deny the existence of god/s."
The CONCEPT god can only be realized in the imagination of man. It is a metaphysical CONCEPT.
The word, "god," can only be defined in terms of opinion and conjecture.
Only the CONCEPT of god can be denied since this god thing is not a reality.
Those who claim to be "atheists," haven't thought thru all facets of their claim.
It's not a new concept that he is portraying here, and many theologians have raised the point, usually because their theism clouds what a non-belief in god actually means. Atheists may or may not follow certain ethical principals, but where atheism differs is that they are choosing whether or not they should follow an ethical choice, rather than doing so, at least in part, because God commands. Atheism is the denial of god, not the denial of ethical principles.
When it comes to Buddhism, talk to Hokey about that one, he is the one to talk to about that, my understanding is though, that yet again it is the following of a path that people believe is right, they look at the works of Buddhism and choose to follow it based on their personal ethical concepts, there is nothing much otherworldly in Buddhism, which is why it would be the closest thing to a religion I would ever consider.
Atheism is simply the denial of Deities. People can argue over the semantics as much as they want, but when you get right down to it, anyone who calls themselves Christian should believe in God, not his principles, because it is through the belief in God that they know the principles to be right, their ethical choice comes second to God. Failure to believe in god is of course one of the worst sins, and therefor leaves these people as closet agnostics, or sinners.
Theists and Theologians like to blur the lines on this to strengthen their arguments, but it does boil down to a rather simple choice, are you Atheist, agnostic, or religious?
As to what I worship?
The closest thing would probably be my fiancée, she is an amazing woman
Nice explanation but there is a benchmark for morality and judgement. If that benchmark approves adultery and goes from there then you have to question how moral is this really. Basing your morals on your own thought opens the door for some pretty wild interpretations. It's dishonest to say you have your morality without acknowledging what it's based on. That makes a huge difference.
As far as Christianity is concerned it's important to love your self but not worship yourself which would indicate a selfish motivation. A true Christian tries to be selfless and thats why we lend ourselves to the guidence of Heavenly Father. Even if you hate religion it is dishonest to say the Ten Comandments aren't the benchmark for morality.
Anything can be a benchmark, the laws Hitler created could be a benchmark.
However I do agree with your point, my ethical beliefs do align closely with the ten commandments, however my upbringing was very non-religious, and even now I could not quote you the ten commandments in their entirety.
I have always done what I thought to be right, never purposefully gone out to hurt someones feelings, never shied away from helping someone in need, and never (knowingly) gone with a girl who was already with someone else.
Of course these are my ethics, and there is room for some peoples ethics to become twisted, which is why a legal system is a good thing to have in place. I think a collective decision on correct ethics for a community is an effective way to keep things in check.
There are of course criminals with twisted ethics, but then again there are people who go on murder sprees in the name of God, both sides have those whose moral views are twisted.
The difference remains that some people do moral things for personal gain, while other do moral things because they feel that it is right.
Why would you assume that Christians only do good to go to Heaven? Is it possible for Christians to be charitable just because it's the right thing to do?
When you get right down to it, aethists worship themselves. Sort of like a dog chasing its own tail.
When you get down to it, that is absolutely rot!
You would have people belief that all non believers are megalomaniacs? Dumb, just plain dumb.
They worship the power of reason in Man. Man's capacity to reason will always lead to freedom and peace. Man is born inherently good, and learn the power of reason to degrees. The more children are taught reason, the more they become self-sustaining individuals and contribute to society in positive ways.
Hi friend Dog On A Mission
Do you mean that you don't worship or follow David Foster Wallace ?
Thanks
Livelonger, I was just discussing this with my husband yesterday.
I think this is the biggest problem that Christians and other religious people have. They clearly have a deep-seated need to believe in or worship something, and they simply can't conceive the possibility that other people might not feel that need.
Perhaps people who don't feel that need are oddities, but I'm convinced they do exist.
See what I mean?
Believing means trusting that something is true without any concrete evidence. Not everyone feels that's necessary in their lives.
A belief is known to be true.
Describe "faith". Faith is an unquestioned belief.
A belief is formed based on factual evidence available. To form the belief, because you have "faith" in yourself to discern truth and lie.
The mystical "faith" proposed by religion does not exist. Faith is only to be placed in yourself or other people, because you and they, are the only ones who can produce factual evidence for their(your) belief.
That's my take again.
Here's what the Oxford English Dictionary says:
noun 1 a feeling that something exists or is true, especially one without proof 2 a firmly held opinion. 3 (belief in) trust or confidence in. 4 religious faith.
I notice the Merriam Webster dictionary sees it differently, so maybe there's a difference in the usage in American and British English.
From the dictionary:
A view is an opinion that is affected by your personal feelings or biases (: his views on life were essentially optimistic), while a sentiment is a more or less settled opinion that may still be colored by emotion (: her sentiments on aging were shared by many other women approaching fifty).
A belief differs from an opinion or a view in that it is not necessarily the creation of the person who holds it; the emphasis here is on the mental acceptance of an idea, a proposition, or a doctrine and on the assurance of its truth (: religious beliefs;
******************
SEE:
the mental acceptance of an idea
Scientists are not sure how we came to be...yet Atheist except the Theory that there is no God
Since there is no way to prove if there is or there is not..then it is a belief held by those who do not believe.
Atheists believe in the things they can see and hear for themselves. They believe in things that have logic behind them.
Why would anyone worship? The word is without meaning to me.
Well, I'm not an atheist, but I found the beginning of the article to be an assumption and too generalized, not to mention, not possible.
Everyone worships something? Simply subjective conjecture at minimum. It is encompassing every person on the planet, just not atheists. Which, this single individual couldn't possibly know.
Prime example: I do not worship anything at all.
There are plenty of things in my life that I love and adore more than anything else, but I do not worship them or the ground they walk on.
I really do wish people would not separate Atheism from religion. Atheism is a religion, it's bound by morality and evidential proof, a.k.a. facts known to humanity.
It has a code of ethics and a higher cause other than self.
Atheism has no belief in a god or a disbelief of god. It doesn't recognize the "GOD" concept's existence at all.
That's my take on it. What do they believe in? Ask each individual and most likely get a different answer.
I don't worship anything, or anybody. I'm not on board with the idea that everybody believes something.
On the other hand, I will agree that everybody has faith. Atheists find faith in their families, for instance. But his is not the same thing as worshipping.
They worship science books.
Death to the imagination.
Maybe we should simplify the word worship to "putting the most value upon" or the "thing in which we derive the most pleasure or security upon". We all do it
Some people don't like the word worship.
You can't change the meaning of words to suit an argument - worship contains adoration within its meaning and it is specifically connected to religion.
To God "nothing" is merely another "something" and therefore all who claim to worship nothing, my question do you know what that nothing actually is?
If you knew, you would NOT worship "nothing".
Don't play with words. That's nonsense. And we are not a God to think 'nothing' is 'something'
Pleaassee !!
Anything someone cannot understand is indeed nonsense to them,
I Agree .
Someone did say I am nothing, I am no one.
I read somewhere by someone that everyone has a "God-shaped-hole" in their lives somewhere. Some people fill that hole by believing in God, some people fill that hole with something else. It could be money, family, drugs, fishing, baking.. you get the point, anything really. The filler is never fixed.
I would pose the argument that atheists don't have to believe in anything but something in their lives is filling that hole
That was no doubt written by someone who had a "god-shaped hole" in his or her own life, and couldn't conceive that people exist who don't have it. Just because someone wrote it, doesn't make it true!
It's like...
peer pressure.
Don't you think? C'mon, EVERYBODY'S doing it!
Not everybody has a hole, whether it's god-shaped or just plain round.
Possibly, but is there nothing in your life that you value above all other things? You simply value nothing or value everything equally. You could take every single item of your life and never have it again?
Maybe it's not a god-shaped hole. Maybe it's not a hole at all.
Yes, I think this is along the lines of what David Foster Wallace said, in slightly different terms.
Don't know if I agree with it or not, which is why I opened it up for discussion.
EArn:
Unfair!
Why would you do battle with the unarmed? :-)
TiVo picked up UFC 89
Haven't seen it yet. I love having a TV friend who takes care of these things for me
I didn't even notice it was on.
I promise to tie one arm behind my back...
He should be OK. A four year old just beat me up again.
I have to be more careful what I say to her twin sister!
Oh yeh? You try and take on the dreaded Asha.
She can argue better than most people on this thread, and she NEVER loses an argument, even if that means using the little Britain method. "Yes, but no but yes but"
If that fails she becomes Asha the basher and just head butts me!
Earn:
Hahahaha.
Hey enroll in a local MMA gym and don't tell Asha!
..then unloosen yer tied behind the back arm...and ya may have a chance next time. ..:-) or am I just dreamin?....lol
Dreaming! I have more scars from the twins than from motorcycle racing!
They are dangerous people these little ones.
I usually just do as I am told. I went to their older sisters 13th birthday on Sunday, and as I hugged the birthday girl, Asha grabbed both my little fingers to drag me off to see her latest interests.
I wish I could learn how to avoid the dreaded 2 pinky hold she has invented, but alas, she has taught the other twin how to do it as well, so I often get dragged around by both of them!
Just to clarify, I didn't ask what you believed, but rather what you worshipped.
Belief is only required in dogmatic religions like Christianity. I know for a fact (because I am Jewish) that Judaism does not require any specific beliefs. But Jews do worship a God (or a concept of one, although skepticism is generally OK).
DFW mentions other things that even atheists can worship:
- money/things
- beauty/sexual allure
- intellect
- power
You may agree or disagree with his point, but I sense most people who are responding didn't read the excerpt.
first, livelonger, where in SF are you? miss it out there.
second. after reading this -in all honesty- would want to see the entire 'speech'. what prompted the dialogue?
also, the notion of 'numbing' fear bothers me, in that most people live day to day in fear -no matter the tag. be it living, dieing, drowning,explosions, aliens, gods or fire ants. so for that person to say they are numb is a bit naive.
i do agree in the term worship with regard to 'unconscious'. it is automatic AFTER the program has been uploaded, so to speak. people go on auto pilot and become slaves to it or how ever many things they put in front of their faces/conceive in their brains.
{{ just me: i call this idolatry, putting a image -other than the one i was made to be- in front of me in addition to the image of the One who made me }}
I live more or less in the middle of the city - a short walk to both the Castro & Cole Valley.
The original post has a link to the entire commencement address that Foster Wallace gave.
I did read the excerpt.
"Worship" means reverence or glorification.
I don't glorify any of these things.
I do not worship anything.
It's presumptuous to make the claim that everybody worships.
Fair enough.
Do you believe that life has any particular meaning, or, more specifically, that any one of us has a responsibility to anything beyond ourselves?
Livelonger:
Are ya referring to "generic" life or "our" lives?
Either, or actually, both, I guess. Maybe there is no answer. Maybe atheists believe that anything beyond their lives is immaterial. I don't know.
I do know several atheists who nevertheless do "good deeds" on behalf of people they don't know (i.e. so they don't get a direct benefit).
I like to think that I gain a lot when I help out a stranger.
Good for my self worth.
Simply because it feels good to help others. I would have thought that would be obvious.
You can build self-worth, by being self-interest first and foremost, which builds self-growth, which leads to self-esteem and self-worth.
When you commit the action of helping another, it is a selfless act, which build human spirituality and love within oneself, providing you already love yourself first.
So is it a biological impulse to help others? (You get an extra burst of serotonin or some other brain chemical, that makes you feel good?) If there were another way to engineer the same feeling of good within you without having to help other people at lower cost, would that do the same trick?
First off, it's not a trick. A trick insinuates a hidden aspect. There is nothing hidden about loving yourself, then loving other human beings the same and helping them out.
It's an emotional tie, which upholds integrity. It takes a person with integrity to help others, in a way that isn't harmful.
Integrity has honesty built-in to it. Honest actions are good. It does give a person a good feeling, which is deemed love for others. Is there a chemical? Please, give me a break. There are thousands of chemicals in the body, which come from a number of various reasons and things.
If you're trying to make some reference to believing in "GOD" through biological aspects, then apparently you're not up to date, on information. The belief of "GOD" is anti-life.
It forces you to fight against your own existence.
I cant help but notice looking back through your posts live longer that you seem to take a very selfish view of everything, each post you make is how you can gain something out of it.
*edit* May have been a bit harsh here, some of your earlier posts were a bit more neutral, the basic point still stands though )
Right from the little things, such as buying a pint for your mate because its your round, rather than flaking, or going to help rescue people in Haiti, some people may do it to feel good, but most people go out there because there are people that need help.
I have done several charitable works, and not because it made me feel good, I certainly did not enjoy any of it, but because these places were in urgent need of help.
Why should you only do something because it makes you feel good? You should do things to uphold your ethics.
I know this was your response to Cagsil, but I wanted to butt in on this point. I think there is a biological impulse to help others and the human race wouldn't have survived without it. We all have the capability for empathy, compassion and love (except for sociopaths but I won't go there right now) - it's part of our hard wiring.
You just need to look at any mother with her newborn to see that naturally she will protect and love that baby, even to her own detriment. This extends outwards to others in our family, especialyy when you think about tribal culture. If we didnt have this biological factor, we simply wouldn't survive. These kinds of acts don't require God or worship in any shape or form - it's simply about being human.
This is separate from doing something for someone else. The connection of love of family or offspring is instinctive and reactionary protection. In the fact, that a mother would put her life before that of the child, would only happen in that manner.
The love we have for ourselves, our own individual being, is what allows for loving others, outside of family and friends, like strangers.
I have protected plenty of people from the dangerous actions of others, because I have integrity and respect for other people, and I recognize their right to live life, just like the person who is committing the dangerous act...they too know full well what they are doing...they are hurting their integrity, but don't care.
Integrity is the foundation for morality. Uphold doing good for others and ensure their protection, just like you would for yourself. It makes for a very stable ground for extreme growth.
I just spent ages replying and it went wrong, lol Will get back to it when I've done the school run.
I don't think the love we experience as babies and children is seperate - it is the foundation for everything else; though we can develop and improve upon it in adulthood. People do regularly put themselves before others in other situations such as the battlefield.
I belive that in general the love we have for ourselves comes from the foundation of the experience of being loved (although again it can be developed in adulthood). Love of self is extremely important.
I agree with most of what you say What I was trying to get at here is that care for our fellow human does not rely on worship, God or any kind of text to tell us how to be good people. We are social animals, and because of that, protection of the community we live in is as important as the preseveration of ourselves. The incentive at the most fundamental level is survival.
Livelonger:
Wait!
"I thought the question was: 'Do you believe that life has any particular meaning, or, more specifically, that any one of us has a responsibility to anything beyond ourselves?"
What does this have to do with atheism?
I don't get it?
???????
I don't understand. Atheists don't believe in a creator. That doesn't mean they don't have beliefs or suppositions about the nature of existence or if there is any purpose to our being here.
your question wasn't about atheists??
I'm not an atheist, agnostic, deist or a believer in supernatural divinities!
I'm a logician and pragmatist.
There is a goal for all life, there is purpose with all life...you have to explain to me whatcha mean by "meaning?" Do you mean it to be something to convey?..or the "aim" of life?
Clear that up for me and I'll respond....ty :-)
I guess I mean "aim" - why would an atheist feel a commitment to the world of 500 years from now?
Livelonger:
First: There are no "athiests."
Secondly: Why do you think that we who proclaim the depth of our ignorance, publicly, wouldn't want human life to exist 500 yrs from now and, hopefully, enjoy it as much or more than we?
What is it in you that inspires you to think that others who don't think like you couldn't possibly share the same desires you seek?
Difference/variety is what makes life interesting, what piques the curiosity of evolving man, what inspires imagination and progress!
What is it in your "character" that engenders a comment like this; "I'm just wondering what explains the "human decency" when there is no immediate benefit to doing so." What makes you so different from "us?"
First, there's no reason to be defensive.
I *do* know that you don't believe the same thing as me, because I believe in "something" and you don't. That doesn't mean that I think I'm better than any non-believer; even by my own ethos, actions matter and belief doesn't.
What I'm curious about is that if atheists believe in life on earth and their own existence, and don't believe in life after death (in any of its various permutations: heaven, reincarnation, olam haba, etc.), then why would an atheist be interested in donating to charity or concerning him/herself with matters that don't affect them directly?
This is an honest question. I get the impression that many atheists don't really stop and think exactly why they do "good deeds" and what their motivation is behind compassion. Christians know (they expect to get rewarded) as do people who follow a religion.
Livelonger:
Did you purposely disregard my first comment?
Didn't mean to make you think I'm being "defensive."
I get the feeling that you, for whatever reason, feel that you are more "human" than we who don't think like you.
Others who read your comments may, very well, get the same impression.
Sorry, I didn't know what to make of it, but it is certainly relevant to the topic. What did you mean by "there are no atheists"?
I'm not arguing that I'm more "human" than non-believers (!), and I'm a bit tired at being accused of it. I am saying that when believers do something good, there is a rationale for it in their particular ethos. Atheists don't have a particular ethos, by definition - so why do they do good things?
livelonger:
There are no atheists.
Atheism simply defined is just this: "..to deny the existence of god/s."
The CONCEPT god can only be realized in the imagination of man. It is a metaphysical CONCEPT.
The word, "god," can only be defined in terms of opinion and conjecture.
Only the CONCEPT of god can be denied since this god thing is not a reality.
Those who claim to be "atheists," haven't thought thru all facets of their claim.
I am curious if you believe in the stuff you write. Better yet, do you seriously think this way?
BS on a stick.
That is also another argument that first originated from the theologians, and is typical or their spin doctor methods.
I deny the existence of the flying spaghetti monster, you can only disagree with a concept, not deny it.
To deny there is a concept is to deny that the person with the concept thought of anything, which is absurd.
The denial of god is my own concept, which people may disagree with if the wish, but it is also the concept of atheism.
Thisis:
lol thought ya had me didn't ya?
To deny is just saying that I refuse to recognize or acknowledge the concept(thought, notion or idea)of an imagined supernatural divinity.
If this god thing cannot be factually defined or known and is incorporeal, but it can be imagined (form a mental picture of)how can it be compared to a flying spaghetti monster? I can define and empirically prove the existence of a spaghetti monster but the "concept: it can fly?..only imagined.
Apples and oranges....:-)
There are no atheists.
With all due respect, it seems like you're splitting hairs here.
Would the definition of atheist as "a person who denies the existence or the concept of a God (or Gods)" be any less valid?
Livelong"
Nope.
I have no idea what this god thing is other than it being a concept...imagined.
Every person could imagine this god thing differently.
There exists today over 35,000 differing sects of protestantism, (cults) worldwide! Each interpreting the bible to meet it's own needs.
The same can happen with an imagined concept of this god thing...whatever it is.
I'm atheist and I quite happily do good deeds, even for no reward. Doing good deeds for your own future glorification is a rather selfish act in my eyes.
Atheists do not lack ethics, the difference is that they do good things because they choose to do so, not because a God dictates that they must. Although may I point out that while this post shows christians as a selfish bunch, I know Christians who genuinely do good things out of their own ethical beliefs rather than for a place in heaven. The will to do good or bad things is down to a personal choice.
You sound like a good man. Enlighten me on the charitable organizations run by atheists and how does their contribution to the world as a whole compare to that of the dumb Christian organizations and their worthless churches?
There are thousands of charitable organisations run by Atheists, most of the ones in England are definately so (There was a story on horizon about it last year).
I am not saying christian organizations are dumb, I am merely questioning how some Christian views are coming across as selfish compared to those who do good deeds because they simply think it is teh right thing to do. (Again, there are plenty of christians who do charitable work selflessly,)
Thats good but I have never heard of a atheist charitable organization here that ran anything near or at all compared to those manned by Christian organizations. In fact when I looked it up I couldn't even find one. If I remember right Christian organization from the US exceeded donations from most other countries. So despite atheists claims that they represent whats good they don't even represent themselves very well.
As I said before atheists are about and for themselves. On the other hand true Christians strive to be selfless and serve their fellow man.
you don't think the Red Cross is a christian charity, do you?
I think that the Red Cross has a stong Christian base of support and I'd wager to say this isn't even a fair arguement because we both know Christian organizations in the US are better organized and have been for a long, long time if not forever.
At one time this country was a Christian organization. Then the adversary got a foot hold and here we are.
Yep! America must have been a great place after the christians murdered all the natives!
Gimme a break!
Which adversary was that - George Washington, or Thomas Jefferson?
The United States is in no sense founded upon
Christian Doctrine ~ G. Washington
Sure the RC has a strong christian base of support. As well it should. But, they are not a christian group.
Let's not argue though about who has the Best Charity.
When exactly did the "Adversary" decide to "get a foothold here? God came here with the Spaniards in the 1500's. He allowed the "new owners" to massacre millions of the native people with violence and disease. They had three chances to renounce their gods before imposing a lifetime of slavery upon them.
Yeah right! I'm sick of hearing about how this country was founded on God.
People like to think this is so, Earnest. Especially if they have no clue about the cruelty imposed upon the "savages." The priests stood by while a chieftain's aged mother was fed to the dogs because the chief would not appear before them and give them the villager's food supply.
This country was founded on greed and is still being operated on this same principle. Only the "believers" believe this garbage about god founding the country.
You are confusing the conquistadors with our founding fathers. But yeah, there was racism all around. I guess you could say their definition of God wasn't "complete".
Well it's a fact and whether you agree or not doesn't have any bearing on the truth.
So believers in "something" only do good things due to a selfish motivation? And you can't figure out what motivates people who don't believe in any type of god-thing? I don't get what you're saying.
Maybe the nonbeliever in a god-thing holds simple values that have been lost in the believer due to indoctrination.
Compassion, and responsibility is the answer here.
Also, a respect for the world of 500 years AGO, and for the advancements and achievements of humanity. Each generation carries on from the next.
Livelonger, atheists take the view that this life is all there is, so they have a vested interest in making the most of it. That means contributing to making the society they live in a worthwhile place.
That makes sense if your commitment is to your immediate environment - to yourself, your family, your friends - because you draw an immediate benefit when you don't see yourself or anyone you love in peril. Almost all of us have a primal drive for our own survival and that of our loved ones that is very difficult to override.
I guess I wonder what motivates atheists to improve the world in a way that they don't get an immediate benefit. Why would an atheist support atmospheric carbon mitigation, for example, when the problems from global warming will likely take effect after they're dead?
Are you assuming atheists have no human feelings and are incapable of caring what will happen to people in the future?
I can only guess from my own experience why atheists or any non believers care about such things. For me it is the love of life, the future of the planet for my loved ones and that every time I help out it makes me feel good. Especially if it is those random encounters where people need a hand, and I am able to provide it.
OK, and I should make it clear that from my personal experience alone, atheists or non-believers are at least as decent (if not more decent) that religious people.
I can understand protecting the welfare of yourself and your loved ones - there is an innate drive to do so in most living creatures.
I'm just wondering what explains the "human decency" when there is no immediate benefit to doing so. You said it makes you feel good to help others; does that come from some sort of belief (that doing something good will mean something or matter somehow in the grand scheme of things), or is it just a biological sensation?
I have been a stranger helper my whole life, so was my dad.
For me it is about self love. I think looking after this beautiful planet and it's inhabitants who cross my path is important aspect of self actualisation.
I always seem to get love in return. If the person I assist does not even say thanks, it matters little to me, I get love anyway, as I know that what I do has real meaning.
I think empathy creates more self love that is healthy and well based.
I like to think of caring for the planet and people is a selfish act, in the best possible way.
That is the best feeling! Good job Earnest! Excuse me I have a stoning to go to!
Wallmart had a special on stones, I couldn't resist!
It is pretty simple isn't it? Thank you for your support. I have learned that your thoughts are similar in this way, and I respect that.
Beats the hell out of being a hypocrite who tells me I am going straight to hell because I don't share their beliefs in the psychotic sky fairy while never helping others or contributing to their fellow man.
You seem to be assuming that atheists are sociopaths. I don't mean that in a stereotypical or mean way.
People who fit into the category you describe here are sociopaths, with no social morality, ethics or conscious. It's not a nice group to be lumped in with.
I have absolutely no idea where you got that idea. Where did I suggest such a thing? (Unless your comment was tongue-in-cheek and I just didn't pick up on it)
It wasn't tongue in cheek, and it also wasn't meant to be rude, if you took it that way. That's why I said I wasn't being stereotypical.
Sociopaths believe anything beyond their lives is immaterial. Healthy people do not believe this.
Atheists who "nevertheless do good deeds" do so to help other people. Your statement implies that religious people only do good deeds because of their god or their faith, or that atheists do good deeds in spite of themselves.
Human decency comes from being human. Since you are asking this in the context of worship and religion, it seems like you are singling out atheists as having no morality.
I'm not giving you a hard time. It's pretty common to hear people say things like this... Atheists can't have morals, atheists don't have compassion, or ethics, etc. See where I'm coming from?
Maybe this will help:
so·ci·o·path
–noun Psychiatry.
a person whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience
Some folks use these exact terms when they are talking about atheists.
Um, no. If that's still your impression, then I'm going to be generous and assume you haven't read what I've written.
I'm coming from a completely different viewpoint, but given many Christians' attacks on atheists along the vein you've described, I can understand the defensiveness. Even though I'm not a Christian.
Don't be generous. I've read your posts all evening.
That post was not an argument, it was an explanation - that's why I carried down the quote (which I did even though I HATE when people do it to me )
You said you had absolutely no idea where I got the idea, so I explained to you where I got the idea. That's all.
Yes, and I said clearly (you even boldfaced it!) that I don't know.
I can't speak to how atheists see the world and how/why they're motivated to do good deeds, although I was crystal clear that I know plenty of atheists do good deeds. My own father--probably the most ethical person I know--is one of them!
Livelong:
Are you religious?
Are you a member of 1 of the 3 major monotheisms?
I bolded it on purpose!
I realize you are asking questions, not making statements. Like I said, I read all of your posts.
Just trying to explain my point of view. When you said you know atheists who do good deeds nevertheless, it sounded like you are coming from the point of view that good deeds are only done in the name of religion.
Nobody thinks this is true.
I was only trying to show you where the idea comes from, I'm not trying to call you out about anything. Sorry if I wasn't more clear about that. You said you had no idea, so I was giving you my perspective.
Say you had an otherwise healthy 80 year old man on a bed at death door, on one hand he is religious, and slips away to his 'eternal heaven'
But, what if he was an atheist, and he had a button, which if pressed would extend his life by ten years, the side effect of which would be the death of three billion people.
By your reasoning an atheist, would, without question, press teh button. However in reality, I don't think I know a single atheist who would press such a button.
Exactly! Most of us plan to leave descendants who will need the earth for a few more centuries at least. Helping one's fellow man is instilled in our instincts. Not all of us though, some are politicians or preachers!
That's quite a jump from maybe atheists don't worship anything to maybe atheists consider everything beyond their own lives immaterial. Awful lot of room for consideration between worship and apathy.
The "Meaning of Life" is exactly what you think it is.
There is no universal answer, I mean. Each individual has his or her own interpretation.
My personal faith is in people. I'm a humanist. So to the question of responsibility: Be responsible for yourself first and foremost. Be responsible for your family, then your friends. The purpose of life is to be happy and healthy, and to help others do the same.
I know quite a few humanists, and respect their actions and tolerance towards others. I used to subscribe to Paul Kurtz's magazine (can't remember the name) and thought it had lots of thought-provoking articles.
At any rate, where does the commitment to help other people come from? To treat yourself makes sense, naturally, and maybe loved ones, too. But why donate to disaster relief, etc.? Why does humanity deserve your faith?
I'm going to give my take on this question, just because I feel the need to express myself and the understanding I have of myself, so as to clearly convey my message.
Meaning for a person's life, is to be determined by the individual. If you want your meaning to be solely beneficial to you only, it leads to selfishness and destructive actions, which will harm others and show a lack of understanding about life, as well, show others that the person has no integrity.
The understanding I have, is to make your life have a purpose, specifically by you, you then strive to fulfill that purpose, by being self-interest(meanings you love yourself and want to learn more), this leads to self-growth and spiritual being. Thus, creates meaning.
As long as the actions are honest, filled with integrity and love, then there will be no harmful effects that can derive from the action set forth.
It is in each person's ability to create, transform and adapt their entire life, so as to command a respectful way of life and achieve happiness.
Just my thought.
Is that a conscious choice with a purpose in mind, or because there's a fundamental biological drive to do so?
I think that very few people worship, whether they classify themselves as believers or as unbelievers. To worship, you have to be limerent.
Much of religion is about cosmology: what does or does not exist. (Deities, demons, angels, spirits, souls.)
But to worship is a very exalted emotional state that has nothing to do with whether we believe the object of our worship exists or not.
We can worship a man or a woman, real, imaginary, or historical, who manifests or symbolizes our highest values. We do not need to believe they are real or currently alive to feel that way.
Many people believe without worshiping. Others worship without believing.
I disagree, but it might be a matter of how we're interpreting the word "worship." I guess I'm using wyanjen's definition, meaning reverence, or very strong respect.
But I take your point that you don't have to believe to worship, don't have to worship to believe, etc.
I think atheists believe in good and bad, but then im only speculating because i dont know, but my view is live and let live. lol
i holi worship tantrum, my only goddess, er, other than Aphrodite, but then I think she is Aphrodite!
We all have an inner Aphrodite. I love Tantrum! She is in ya face straight. A very smart and beautiful woman. We have so many smart women on hubpages, us guys pull a poor second!
If you think that Buddhist worship the Four Noble Truths, you have a complete lack of understanding about Buddhism.
They have a good sense of human morality, reinforced by their integrity, upheld by love for oneself and others.
Whats your benchmark for morality? That would be important to know.
To make sure that I live my life, not only for myself. I remain honest in my actions and I provide help whenever I am able. I've learned to love myself, therefore, I have no problem loving the rest of humanity, and accepting them. We are all human beings and we should all be working together to strive for a better future.
When actions are honest, it show integrity of a person. When it helps someone else then it is morally right.
thisisoli: Sadly, you've misinterpreted my point of view. You're not the first in this thread.
I have not argued that atheists lack ethics. I have said this over and over and over again in this thread. How typical of your average Hubpages user to not read something and instead react to what they think you said.
I've said again and again (and again) that I have known plenty of ethical atheists, who do selfless things. What I don't understand is the rationale. What compels atheists to act ethically when there isn't a religious ethos that incorporates ethical behavior?
Yes, I understand completely that people have free will to do good things as they please, whether they're a believer or not. That much is obvious. Buying a pint for a friend has an easily-explainable rationale: your friend will reciprocate, or do something as generous or as friendly on your behalf at some point in the future.
This was the reason for my example about combating global warming. There is no direct personal benefit unless your religious or personal ethos demands respect for/protection of the planet.
What I surmise from your answer and those of others is that atheists can believe and worship something, it's just not God. (It can be humanity, Earth, etc.)
Ok, I apologise if I misinterpreted your points,
I have now gone through the thread and think most of what I said stands, but I did rush in to a couple of things maybe (It is 2am here so it was a lot of reading!)
I am personally aligned against carbon based global warming promoters, but for the sake of argument I will use it as an example, as if it were the cause of the actual problem, and that there was a simple thing that I (along with others) could do to solve the problem.
I would do this thing because I had decided that it would be the right thing to do, for humanity as a whole.
This does not mean I worship humanity, I am not attempting to glorify it, or personify it. It simply means that my ethical viewpoint stands in helping people, be it one person or the entire human population. And with such an impersonal effect there would definitely be no 'warm glow'
A couple of years back I was walking to a night club and came across this girl having a severe asthma attack on a bridge, I instantly called an ambulance, and made sure she was okay till they arrived.
What caused me to do this?
I won't lie, when you do something as personal as that (As opposed to stopping global warming) I did get a bit of self satisfaction from helping someone, but I didn't stop and help her for a bit of self satisfaction, I stopped and helped her because she needed help. This was to my net loss, I had to stand around in the cold for 10 minutes I had to pay an extra £10 to get in to the night club, and I could have been doing things that I would have enjoyed, however my own moral compass would have made me detest myself for leaving a suffering human being in distress.
Maybe the feeling you are looking for is 'guilt', but I don't feel guilty if I rush past someone who is lost in city on the way to work, but if I have time I do help them.
It is always an ethical decision, I always choose whether or not to help someone, it isn't a feeling that provokes my assistance, it is a thought.
OK, but invoking "moral compass" begs the question, where did the moral compass come from?
At any rate, it's late where you are and I thank you for thorough responses.
a moral compass in my opinion comes from upbringing, you are brought in to the morales around you. All my morales have come from an atheist family line on both sides. Morality is judged by the morales of those around you, but ultimately it is the thought process that lets you decide, from your own experiences whether or not something is wrong or right.
People may question the morality of the 9/11 bombers, but do they question the morality of the American response?
America became a terrorist target because it was manipulating other countries and killing thousands upon thousands.
My own moral view is that both countries should stop attacking each other, unfortunately my common sense view finds it a hard proposition to believe.
Although let me state that in that particular conflict, since my moral viewpoint lays more towards western standards I would automatically side with America, even though morally I would disagree with the countries interference with each other.
Morality is a truely variable thing, but why should christianity be the decider of the moral compass?
I don't think it is, except for Christians.
I hope you didn't mean wrt the Iraq War! Despite all the blather about religion and the Crusades, this was pretty much about oil.
The currency oil is sold in to be exact. (There are a lot of interesting things about that whole fiasco, I think that is for another discussion though!)
My point was that many Americans felt they were morally justified in the retaliation of 9/11, despite the fact that 9/11 itself was a (Morally justified in their eyes) retaliation for a far greater number of deaths.
My opinion is that neither country is in the right for their military presence in each others country, be it army or suicide bomber. I kinda wish everyone would 'just get along'.
Realistically though that is a long way off.
The simplest benchmark for human morality is based on the expressed definitions of True Integrity.
Integrity dictates morality.
Just a thought.
Who decided what the defination of integrity is?
Oh please. Integrity isn't defined by "GOD". Integrity is a human character trait, taught to children by parents, who understand what it means to be good to others. No harming of others in action.
As long as the action is honest and with love, it will always be beneficial or helpful to others.
I was not aware that Atheists practiced the act of worshiping.
Are you kidding me? This is so silly. Atheists do not need to worship. Seriously, what were you thinking?
I think the majority of Christians have lost their way. Therefore, their "charitable" contributions always come with a bigger price tag, than the gift warrants.
Herd animals protect their own kind. Even though the animals they are protecting are in competition with them for food and water, the other animals still protect them. Do they do this because they are religious? Of course not! It is the instinct to preserve their life form. The instinct of survival in all living things.
The Ten Commandments are merely basic rules for living with one's fellow man in tribes and groups. Otherwise, the harmony of the groups or tribes is disturbed. They were around many thousands of years before biblical times.
As to the link http://www.christianity.co.nz/moralit2.htm
This is a typic religious argument that picks a flaw in a pattern and then gives god as an ultimatum, in this case a benchmark.
It is true that there are moralities behind both nazi beliefs and my own, but this does not suddenly mean that I need 'gods law as a benchmark.
Morales differ all over the world, in some cultures cannabalism is accepted, in a thousand years our own morales will probably seem barbaric.
The biblical morales such as the ten commandments are basically your normal morales, and infact much of the nazi propaganda waws taken from biblical verse. The bible, just like anything, can be twisted to your own viewpoint quite easily.
The day I need an invisible omnipotent character to judge my own morales is the day I should stop trusting my own morales, and instead trust those of the nearest psychiatric hospital.
I agree completely. Truth is not a testament of faith, but rather the result of dialogue, a process without an end.
When you trust your own morals, that's when you go wrong! Let Got!!!! My girlfriend and I prayed last night about a blockage in her heart. When she went to get her opperation today, the blockage was gone!!! We had faith that God would remove it AND HE DID!!!!! YOU MUST BELIEVE WITHOUT A DOUBT, WITHOUT A DOUBT, WITHOUT A DOUBT!!!!
What if it hadn't turned out that way? Would you blame Satan?
Entertaining as this is it has gone past 3am here so I really need to get some shut eye!
Night all!
P.S. The different morales in different countries is not necesarily a bad thing, I have travelled a lot of the globe, and intend to travel a lot more throughout my lifetime, if everywhere was the same, the world would be a much less interesting place.
Sorry Earnest, Atheism is a religion.
Atheism is a moral code of ethics, bound to a higher cause other than self.
That is exactly what "Christianity" religion is too. A moral code of ethics, bound to a higher cause other than self....it labels it's higher cause as "GOD".
No, atheists just do not believe in god. No other belief system needs to replace this fallacy, I would suggest a definition of "not gullible enough for religion."
You have religionists and those who do not believe in it. How is that a religion?
Sorry to disagree but there are no written code of ethics written for atheism and atheists don't follow any leader either. I can be atheist and prefer not to follow humanity or i can be atheist and can be as tolerant as theists. There is no code of ethics written for atheism.
The two differences between Atheism and Christianity is one is reality based and the latter is mystic based, in beliefs.
And, Atheism is unorganized, as to Christianity which is organized.
Otherwise, they are both classified as a religion.
Classified by whom ? Code of ethics written by whom ?
If it's unorganized yet religion how come it has difference of opinion for same set of concepts ? I can be atheist and deny big-bang and prefer to have big-crunch concept while rest of the atheists may or may not agree with me. Skepticism is part of atheism, is being skeptical is being religious ? No.
I agree Susana, what you say comes from logic, not hard to fathom, no gods required.
First off atheism has no written code of ethics, atheism is about thought and personal choice, so it is up to the atheist in question whether or not they follow the laws and morales of a country, or indeed form their own Morales.
Atheism is not centralized.
Mikel Atheism is not a religion for the following reasons in contradiction to your hub.
First off, the dictionary definition you extracted
"something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience"
This is a common misconception, Atheism is not belief in something, it is about belief that there is not anything there. Again, atheism itself is not based around ethics or conscience, but around scientific fact and common sense.
While science cannot conclusively prove the power of an omnipotent being, since an omnipotent being could of course simply decide not to be found, we can prove that it is scientifically improbably. This is much more conclusive than any proof backing the existence of God.
Under me and my imaginary friend, this is generally a joke argument from the Atheists since most religious people do not even imagine a god, they merely believe in him. However there is a difference between faith and facts. Atheism is founded on science and facts, nowhere does it call for belief in a deity or for the following of obscure rituals.
I am atheist because I have looked at the facts, I have looked at reason, and I have looked at common sense, none of which could put any more substantial belief in God than Santa.
Atheists often argue when religious people publicly talk about the belief of Gods simply because it seems insane to us. Belief in a higher being with no proof is illogical.
I think it is also important to note that the term belief is often misquoted, a personal belief refers to my views on a subject, but I base my beliefs on fact, I also have my moral beliefs. However this does not denote a belief in any religious sense.
May I point out though that one of my personal beliefs is that people should be able to believe what they want, it is not my place to tell someone they must not believe in God, all I can do is state my argument for the nonexistance of God.
I am a very spiritual person but I don't worship anything or anyone! I don't see any reason to.
Nay! I swear by the day of resurrection.
2. Nay! I swear by the self-accusing soul.
3. Does man think that We shall not gather his bones?
4. Yea! We are able to make complete his very fingertips
5. Nay! man desires to give the lie to what is before him.
6. He asks: When is the day of resurrection?
7. So when the sight becomes dazed,
8. And the moon becomes dark,
9. And the sun and the moon are brought together,
10. Man shall say on that day: Whither to fly to?
11. By no means! there shall be no place of refuge!
12. With your Lord alone shall on that.day be the place of rest.
13. Man shall on that day be informed of what he sent before and (what he) put off.
14. Nay! man is evidence against himself,
15. Though he puts forth his excuses.
16. Do not move your tongue with it to make haste with it,
17. Surely on Us (devolves) the collecting of it and the reciting of it.
18. Therefore when We have recited it, follow its recitation.
19. Again on Us (devolves) the explaining of it.
20. Nay! But you love the present life,
21. And neglect the hereafter.
22. (Some) faces on that day shall be bright,
23. Looking to their Lord.
24. And (other) faces on that day shall be gloomy,
25. Knowing that there will be made to befall them some great calamity.
26. Nay! When it comes up to the throat,
27. And it is said: Who will be a magician?
28. And he is sure that it is the (hour of) parting
29. And affliction is combined with affliction;
30. To your Lord on that day shall be the driving.
31. So he did not accept the truth, nor did he pray,
32. But called the truth a lie and turned back,
33. Then he went to his followers, walking away in haughtiness.
34. Nearer to you (is destruction) and nearer,
35. Again (consider how) nearer to you and nearer.
36. Does man think that he is to be left to wander without an aim?
37. Was he not a small seed in the seminal elements,
38. Then he was a clot of blood, so He created (him) then made (him) perfect.
39. Then He made of him two kinds, the male and the female.
40. Is not He able to give life to the dead?
The Holy Qura'an -Surat 75 - The Resurrection
rotflmao!!!
whew!
When I gained control, I rolled my eyes up and back and sighed audibly in absolute disbelief!
I ask you, is it any wonder why man is suffering as he is and losing his fight to survive?
From the article:
"There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. "
The author makes this claim but does not explain it from the get go, hence his argument is a non-starter.
Atheists don't *have* to worship anything. Neither does any one else. However, what becomes *important* in anyone's life is a pretty strong indicator of their experiences and where they will put their trust. Hence, I believe, the broadness of scope as was suggested in the original quote, *can* be accurate in many cases. We can focus on money, power, sex, religion, etc. It's true that they can become our demi-gods, but to simply state that this is all a type of worship is a broad generalization that I just don't think is really accurate.
I believe in a lot of things, but when it comes to God and the universe, it's all a puzzlement to me. There certainly aren't a lot of convincing answers for me. And I don't consider myself an atheist, and the believers think I'm an atheist. I'm certainly not alone in all this.
Worship? Why would a non believer need to worship anything?
i have a main philosophy...if you poke me in the eye: >
you get ten back: <<<<<<<<<<
it all comes in tens...lol
Love just oozes out of the quoran.
Qur’an 8:12 cp. 8:60 “Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers”; “smite above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them”
Qur’an 2:191 “...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them”
Ah! Love at it's best!
Would this be why the lunatic taliban like to cut peoples limbs off?
Question:"Atheists: what do you worship?
Answer:
Hi friends
The Atheists worship doubt and confusion; that is why they themselves name themeselves as "Skeptics" or the people of profound doubt;never achieving certainty, truth and reality.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
Peaceful huh?
So attacking and lying about people is Peace? Interesting. Thank you for teaching me how Wrong Minded and Agrresive Muslimism is.
Thank you Usmanali.
Hi friend Mark Knowles
Is usmanali your real name?
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
You are not my friend, Usmanali. I do not believe in having sex with 12 year old girls like your prophet does.
Peaceful Atheism Makes Sense.
No God - Nothing to Kill for.
RAmen
Is this the same muslim that is hiding from some boogy man, and keeps getting outed cos he can't change his writing style enough to fool anyone?
Atheism is not a belief. It is lack of belief. Simple as that. Atheism tells you one thing and one thing only about a person, that they lack belief in god or gods. It tells you zero about what, if anything, they do believe.
The idea that atheism is a religion is absurd. Is lack of belief in Bigfoot a religion?
by James Q smith 15 years ago
Just a question, but it would seem if there really were no God, then Atheists couldn't exist. Is Atheism a religion? They definitely seem to be unified by a common belief.
by Brittany Williams 4 years ago
Atheism only means the lack of a belief in God. Why is it so hard for Christians to realize that we dismiss their religion for the same reasons that they dismiss all other religions? It doesn't make us horrible people, immoral, or mean that we are going to hell. It just means that we think the...
by Claire Evans 8 years ago
We hear often of atheists claiming that have looked for evidence of God but can find none but what would convince them? How do they go about investigating? How do they expect believers to prove it to them when it can only be proved to oneself and not by another?
by M. T. Dremer 9 years ago
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?If you're a theist, what's something positive you could say about atheists? If you're an atheist, what's something positive you could say about theists? Please no sarcastic or passive-aggressive responses.
by Mahaveer Sanglikar 11 years ago
Is atheism becoming another religion? I am asking this question because many atheists are loudly talking against 'other' religions, like many of the the propagandists of religions do.I myself am an atheist, and I think it is not necessary to speak against religions. Instead of that we should...
by Claire Evans 5 years ago
It's easy to deconvert to atheism because they are disappointed, hurt or because they have lost their faith due to God making sense. It's harder to suddenly make a rational atheists convert to Christianity, which is faith-based. How does it happen?
Copyright © 2024 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2024 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.
For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy
Show DetailsNecessary | |
---|---|
HubPages Device ID | This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons. |
Login | This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service. |
Google Recaptcha | This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy) |
Akismet | This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Google Analytics | This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Traffic Pixel | This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized. |
Amazon Web Services | This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy) |
Cloudflare | This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Hosted Libraries | Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy) |
Features | |
---|---|
Google Custom Search | This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Maps | Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Charts | This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy) |
Google AdSense Host API | This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Google YouTube | Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Vimeo | Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Paypal | This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Login | You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Maven | This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy) |
Marketing | |
---|---|
Google AdSense | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Google DoubleClick | Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Index Exchange | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Sovrn | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Ads | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
AppNexus | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Openx | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Rubicon Project | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
TripleLift | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Say Media | We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy) |
Remarketing Pixels | We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites. |
Conversion Tracking Pixels | We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service. |
Statistics | |
---|---|
Author Google Analytics | This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy) |
Comscore | ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Tracking Pixel | Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy) |
Clicksco | This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy) |