So Neo, did you know that Atheism is a religion?

[laklak]

I love the smell of Old Bay in the morning.

[Dries van Tonder]

Holy shit; and all this time I thought atheism was the lack of believe in jumper cables. Fuck, I need to find another forum!

[Rob]

I believe that there is real benefit in encouraging free thought and take any chance I get to correct people on their misinformed notion of what exactly atheism is.

I love free thought. So, I was thinking that it might be probative to discuss what it is that you think "atheism" is, exactly.

Did you know that "Atheism" is a religion?

lol.

[HomerJay]

I thought Atheism was a journey through billions of years of fairy dust?

We are stardust
we are golden
We are billion year old carbon
And we got to get ourselves back to the garden.

[Santa_Claus]

If I can't be a Cardinal can I be an Oriel?

If you're willing to move to Baltimore.

Er'body need to Shut the Fuck Up...

[Seth]

No, it's not. It's a philosophy. Religions have rituals, dieties, leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights.

Really? How strange, because a definition of "religion" says nothing about such things. Religion is, or can be, "something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience; a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith; something of overwhelming importance to a person; a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion."

Nowhere in those several definitions from several authoritative dictionary sources is there a requirement for "rituals, dieties (sic), leading figures, holy books, faith-based beliefs, and passage rights."

You are applying but one narrow definition of theistic religion, but there are non-theistic religions as well...like Atheism...or Secular Humanism.

The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.

The key to arriving at an acceptable definition of religion lies in recognizing that religion is a concept which is at once teleological, normative, and orienting (which also explains its enormous importance). It is teleological in that it aims at practice, or a way of life. It is normative, in that it is concerned with providing standards of both morality, or right and wrong, and teleology, or right purpose. And it is orienting, in that religions offer an account of the nature of human beings, the universe, and the relationship between the two.

We would define religion, then, in this way: religions are bodies of doctrine that specify a way of life centered on the maximization of the good, where the good includes both morality and right purpose. Source: http://www.progressiveliving.org/defini ... efined.htm

Theism is a specific set of beliefs in a supernatural deity or power. It's WHAT you believe.

Religion is HOW you go about practicing what you believe, and that need not include any of the attributes you mention, although it often does include one or more such aspects.

I claim that "Atheism" (in the big "A" sense) is a religion because the practitioners meet all the requirements of the definition of religion I've presented.

[Seth]

It isn't even a philosophy in my view. Its the absence of a belief in a supernatural being called god.

Nope, not always.

There are implicit atheists (the kind you refer to) and there are explicit atheists, which is everyone who has been exposed to theistic concepts and ideas and who has made a decision to reject theistic concepts and claims.

Only young children, mental defectives, and people raised with absolutely no exposure to theistic concepts, which lets out just about everyone, can be implicit atheists.

Everyone else has seen, examined and rejected theistic claims and concepts, and they are therefore explicit atheists who have formed a belief system around that rejection, and can, under certain circumstances, practice their beliefs religiously, making Atheism (big "A") every bit as much of a religion as any other.

[Seth]

No it's not even a philosophy. Atheist can be an adjective describing a philosophy, or anything else, that lacks theism.

Nope. Nothing in the various definitions of religion require theistic beliefs. Buddhism and Secular Humanism, and even Scientology for example are all non-theistic religions.

[rachelbean]

It's semantics. You are saying rejection of beliefs constitutes its own belief, others are saying it doesn't. You aren't going to convince anyone and they aren't going to convince you. Then again I suppose that's how most these discussions go

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's semantics. You are saying rejection of beliefs constitutes its own belief, others are saying it doesn't. You aren't going to convince anyone and they aren't going to convince you. Then again I suppose that's how most these discussions go

Special pleading. Nothing new there.

[Gallstones]

Atheism is nothing more than an idea about the existence of deities.

Despite being atheist I do not practice any rituals attributable to atheism--I simply am not convinced of the existence of a deity. That's all. I think my level of apathy regarding the possibility of a deity negates atheism being any kind of practice on my part, and therefor in no way can I be considered religious or practicing a religion--there are some remnants of catholicism in my psychology that I am happy enough to allow to continue to exist. But, I don't practice Catholicism either--ergo I am not religious in that regard.

[Seth]

It's semantics. You are saying rejection of beliefs constitutes its own belief, others are saying it doesn't. You aren't going to convince anyone and they aren't going to convince you. Then again I suppose that's how most these discussions go

Indeed. A rejection of beliefs cannot be other than a belief, particularly when the beliefs rejected are not subject to critically robust proofs.

And what's wrong with having the discussion?

[Seth]

Atheism is nothing more than an idea about the existence of deities.

Correct. It's a belief. And holding a belief is an essential predicate to engaging in religion. It is how you go about observing that belief that determines whether you are doing so religiously or not.

Despite being atheist I do not practice any rituals attributable to atheism--I simply am not convinced of the existence of a deity. That's all. I think my level of apathy regarding the possibility of a deity negates atheism being any kind of practice on my part, and therefor in no way can I be considered religious or practicing a religion--there are some remnants of catholicism in my psychology that I am happy enough to allow to continue to exist. But, I don't practice Catholicism either--ergo I am not religious in that regard.

Then you may not be a religious Atheist, but merely an atheist.

[stripes4]

Atheism is nothing more than an idea about the existence of deities.

Correct. It's a belief. And holding a belief is an essential predicate to engaging in religion. It is how you go about observing that belief that determines whether you are doing so religiously or not.

Despite being atheist I do not practice any rituals attributable to atheism--I simply am not convinced of the existence of a deity. That's all. I think my level of apathy regarding the possibility of a deity negates atheism being any kind of practice on my part, and therefor in no way can I be considered religious or practicing a religion--there are some remnants of catholicism in my psychology that I am happy enough to allow to continue to exist. But, I don't practice Catholicism either--ergo I am not religious in that regard.

Then you may not be a religious Atheist, but merely an atheist.

Holding a belief is not necessarily ONLY an essential predicate to engaging in religion, as you well know. I believe that the taste I have in my mouth is due to my spicy burritos repeating on me. This is not connected to religion. A dog has 4 legs. All animals with 4 legs are not dogs.

[Seth]

Atheism is nothing more than an idea about the existence of deities.

Correct. It's a belief. And holding a belief is an essential predicate to engaging in religion. It is how you go about observing that belief that determines whether you are doing so religiously or not.

Despite being atheist I do not practice any rituals attributable to atheism--I simply am not convinced of the existence of a deity. That's all. I think my level of apathy regarding the possibility of a deity negates atheism being any kind of practice on my part, and therefor in no way can I be considered religious or practicing a religion--there are some remnants of catholicism in my psychology that I am happy enough to allow to continue to exist. But, I don't practice Catholicism either--ergo I am not religious in that regard.

Then you may not be a religious Atheist, but merely an atheist.

Holding a belief is not necessarily ONLY an essential predicate to engaging in religion, as you well know. I believe that the taste I have in my mouth is due to my spicy burritos repeating on me. This is not connected to religion. A dog has 4 legs. All animals with 4 legs are not dogs.

Correct, it's not the only predicate, as the definitions state, how one goes about practicing or observing a belief determines if it is a religiously-held belief. But the belief is a necessary part of the observation or practice.