Bill Maher - Atheism is Not a Religion

[Drewish]

Or to put it more bluntly, real atheism means staring oblivion straight in the face.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

According to you, what is the definition of an atheist?

Someone who accepts that when they die, that's it. If you don't believe in any sort of afterlife you're an atheist as far as I'm concerned.

I recognize that some people might say that there could be a deistic atheist by that definition, or somebody who believes in auras but is also an atheist, but there isn't. I assert that there is no person alive who simultaneous believes in God or New Age Healing who does not also believe in some form of continued existence after death. If you disagree please find me such a person as I will be shocked to find that they exist.

I can't agree with your definition, Andrew. An atheist has no belief in any god. End of.

It is quite feasible to believe in, or accept the possibility of, an afterlife without any belief in a god. Many people do just that. Quite a few of them call themselves atheists - and correctly.

Your argument places cause before effect: all theists believe in an afterlife so anyone that believes in an afterlife is a theist. You might as well say that all cats have 4 legs so anything with four legs (including a pool table) is a cat.

Anyone who believes in ghosts and an afterlife isn't an atheist as far as I'm concerned. By your definition somebody who literally believed in the religion of the Jedi would be an atheist because "the force" isn't sentient. Mine means that if you don't have the balls to face your own mortality you don't get to call yourself an atheist, and I'll say as much to any sissy fairy tale believer who wants to claim they're an atheist.

You are stretching the definition to include what you would prefer it to include. This is a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. No real atheist would make such a mistake, therefore you are a muslim.

And i had a feeling you might quote my unfixed post.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Anyone who believes in ghosts and an afterlife isn't an atheist as far as I'm concerned. By your definition somebody who literally believed in the religion of the Jedi would be an atheist because "the force" isn't sentient. Mine means that if you don't have the balls to face your own mortality you don't get to call yourself an atheist, and I'll say as much to any sissy fairy tale believer who wants to claim they're an atheist.

Forgive my intrusion into y'all's discussion, but it appears that you're confusing atheism with either materialism or rationalism. theism is defined by a belief in god(s), not an afterlife. I'm sure you know that already.

[Drewish]

Find me the person who believes in God (not an agnostic who's like "maybe" but somebody who really does believe in God) but doesn't believe in an afterlife. You say I'm reversing cause and effect, but I'm not. Belief in an afterlife is the reason that people believe in God. That's why you won't find any Deists who accept their own ultimate mortality. Go prove me wrong. People believe in the supernatural because they are (for whatever reason) not satisfied with the natural. You're looking at faith as if it were rational, ti's not. It's emotional and the result (an afterlife) is the justification for believing in the cause (God). That's why there are 'spiritual' people who believe in ghosts but not God. They're no atheists.

[Drewish]

Anyone who believes in ghosts and an afterlife isn't an atheist as far as I'm concerned. By your definition somebody who literally believed in the religion of the Jedi would be an atheist because "the force" isn't sentient. Mine means that if you don't have the balls to face your own mortality you don't get to call yourself an atheist, and I'll say as much to any sissy fairy tale believer who wants to claim they're an atheist.

Forgive my intrusion into y'all's discussion, but it appears that you're confusing atheism with either materialism or rationalism. theism is defined by a belief in god(s), not an afterlife. I'm sure you know that already.

Wrong. Pantheism for example is a form of theism with supernatural qualities where no deity exists outside of nature itself (but where the supernatural exists non-the less as part of nature). I can't help it if your view of theism is so rigid as to exclude non-monotheistic religions.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Find me the person who believes in God (not an agnostic who's like "maybe" but somebody who really does believe in God) but doesn't believe in an afterlife. You say I'm reversing cause and effect, but I'm not. Belief in an afterlife is the reason that people believe in God. That's why you won't find any Deists who accept their own ultimate mortality. Go prove me wrong. People believe in the supernatural because they are (for whatever reason) not satisfied with the natural. You're looking at faith as if it were rational, ti's not. It's emotional and the result (an afterlife) is the justification for believing in the cause (God). That's why there are 'spiritual' people who believe in ghosts but not God. They're no atheists.

Why do I need to find a deist/theist that doesn't believe in an afterlife? That is bass-ackwards!

Atheism makes NO claims about belief in anything other than gods. Belief in an afterlife is NOT predicated upon a belief in god, hence an atheist can still be an atheist and believe in an afterlife. Just as an atheist can believe in telepathy, fairies, UFO abductions, 911 conspiracy theories, Elvis working in the chip shop down the road or honest lawyers!

Atheism is not a philosophy or a way of life. It is not a political stance. It is only the condition of not believing in a single postulate: that there exists a god or gods.

[Drewish]

Find me the person who believes in God (not an agnostic who's like "maybe" but somebody who really does believe in God) but doesn't believe in an afterlife. You say I'm reversing cause and effect, but I'm not. Belief in an afterlife is the reason that people believe in God. That's why you won't find any Deists who accept their own ultimate mortality. Go prove me wrong. People believe in the supernatural because they are (for whatever reason) not satisfied with the natural. You're looking at faith as if it were rational, ti's not. It's emotional and the result (an afterlife) is the justification for believing in the cause (God). That's why there are 'spiritual' people who believe in ghosts but not God. They're no atheists.

Why do I need to find a deist/theist that doesn't believe in an afterlife? That is bass-ackwards!

Atheism makes NO claims about belief in anything other than gods. Belief in an afterlife is NOT predicated upon a belief in god, hence an atheist can still be an atheist and believe in an afterlife. Just as an atheist can believe in telepathy, fairies, UFO abductions, 911 conspiracy theories, Elvis working in the chip shop down the road or honest lawyers!

Atheism is not a philosophy or a way of life. It is not a political stance. It is only the condition of not believing in a single postulate: that there exists a god or gods.

UFO abductions, 911 conspiracy theories do not require a belief in the supernatural. They are completely different beasts. You have far to narrow a view of what constitutes a god and you should go talk to more religious and spiritual people to see what the faithful actually believe. You also completely ignored my point about about pantheism and just shrugged off my call for a single data point to prove me wrong. I (unfortunately) have a much clearer understanding of the psychology of a believer than you do (perhaps because my de-conversion is merely a few years in the past and occurred as an adult. I don't know your story). The difference between someone who ways, "I believe in God," and someone who say, "I believe in spirits and ghosts, but not God," is a matter of religious semantics, not the rejection of a higher power, or the supernatural, or even of 'gods' just of 'God' in the western tradition. If that's the case then every Buddhist is an atheist, every Wiccan is an atheist, etc... Go talk to some former Buddhists and Wiccans and tell them that they were atheists. They'll laugh.

[FBM]

atheist 1570s, from Fr. athéiste (16c.), from Gk. atheos "without god, denying the gods; abandoned of the gods; godless, ungodly," from a- "without" + theos "a god" (see Thea).
The existence of a world without God seems to me less absurd than the presence of a God, existing in all his perfection, creating an imperfect man in order to make him run the risk of Hell. [Armand Salacrou, "Certitudes et incertitudes," 1943]

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=atheist

[Thumpalumpacus]

Anyone who believes in ghosts and an afterlife isn't an atheist as far as I'm concerned. By your definition somebody who literally believed in the religion of the Jedi would be an atheist because "the force" isn't sentient. Mine means that if you don't have the balls to face your own mortality you don't get to call yourself an atheist, and I'll say as much to any sissy fairy tale believer who wants to claim they're an atheist.

Forgive my intrusion into y'all's discussion, but it appears that you're confusing atheism with either materialism or rationalism. theism is defined by a belief in god(s), not an afterlife. I'm sure you know that already.

Wrong. Pantheism for example is a form of theism with supernatural qualities where no deity exists outside of nature itself (but where the supernatural exists non-the less as part of nature). I can't help it if your view of theism is so rigid as to exclude non-monotheistic religions.

Wait, there's no reason to be rude to me like that. Was I rude to you?

[Drewish]

Jesus Fucking Bullshit Christ. When apophenia claimed to simultaneously worship a goddess and be an atheist, nobody challenged it but me. When Tero started claiming that libertarians aren't real atheists, nobody challenged it but me. When I claim that believing in a supernatural force and spirits qualifies as theism people start with the logical fallacy hunting and quoting dictionaries like that means something. Just stop and consider for one second that the issue might be that you're not understanding my point rather than the other way around.

EDIT -

I apologize Thumpalumpacus. Rereading my comment, that last sentence does come off fairly snarky. I didn't not intend it that way and I'm sorry.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Find me the person who believes in God (not an agnostic who's like "maybe" but somebody who really does believe in God) but doesn't believe in an afterlife. You say I'm reversing cause and effect, but I'm not. Belief in an afterlife is the reason that people believe in God. That's why you won't find any Deists who accept their own ultimate mortality. Go prove me wrong. People believe in the supernatural because they are (for whatever reason) not satisfied with the natural. You're looking at faith as if it were rational, ti's not. It's emotional and the result (an afterlife) is the justification for believing in the cause (God). That's why there are 'spiritual' people who believe in ghosts but not God. They're no atheists.

Why do I need to find a deist/theist that doesn't believe in an afterlife? That is bass-ackwards!

Atheism makes NO claims about belief in anything other than gods. Belief in an afterlife is NOT predicated upon a belief in god, hence an atheist can still be an atheist and believe in an afterlife. Just as an atheist can believe in telepathy, fairies, UFO abductions, 911 conspiracy theories, Elvis working in the chip shop down the road or honest lawyers!

Atheism is not a philosophy or a way of life. It is not a political stance. It is only the condition of not believing in a single postulate: that there exists a god or gods.

UFO abductions, 911 conspiracy theories do not require a belief in the supernatural. They are completely different beasts.

Strawman. Irrelevant to the argument. Other examples in my list - namely telepathy and fairies - do require belief in the supernatural.

You have far to narrow a view of what constitutes a god and you should go talk to more religious and spiritual people to see what the faithful actually believe.

Another strawman. My view of what constitutes a god is completely immaterial to the point in question. I merely claim that an atheist is defined as someone that does not believe in any of them, whatever form they may take.

You also completely ignored my point about about pantheism

Because, once again, it was irrelevant! Believing that everything is god, or god is in everything, or that I am a god, or in the existence of anything that you describe as god in any way, shape or form negates atheism.

and just shrugged off my call for a single data point to prove me wrong.

No I didn't. I claimed that such a counter-example was not necessary because ANYONE that believes in any kind of a god, whether they combine that with a belief in an afterlife or not, cannot be an atheist. However, if you want an example (which proves nothing) check out the sadducees. There are others.
As an example of the opposite stance (belief in an afterlife/continued existence without belief in god) you need look no further than buddhism, many schools of which include no belief in deities. Also you could check out the non-religious, philosophical stance of Open Individualism.

I (unfortunately) have a much clearer understanding of the psychology of a believer than you do

A claim that I don't find patronising in the slightest.

(perhaps because my de-conversion is merely a few years in the past and occurred as an adult. I don't know your story).

But you still feel fit to make the claim above?

The difference between someone who ways, "I believe in God," and someone who say, "I believe in spirits and ghosts, but not God," is a matter of religious semantics, not the rejection of a higher power, or the supernatural, or even of 'gods' just of 'God' in the western tradition.

So you are now the arbiter of what constitutes a god? Arrogant much? Please provide your citations for any widely held views of all and any supernatural entities being gods?

If that's the case then every Buddhist is an atheist, every Wiccan is an atheist, etc... Go talk to some former Buddhists and Wiccans and tell them that they were atheists. They'll laugh.

FBM for example? (Which stands for Former Buddhist Monk btw, if you didn't know.) Perhaps you should ask him his opinion. But why bother, eh, he clearly knows far less about the psychology of the believer than you do. Tell you what, just put words into his mouth and tell him what he thinks.

Oh, and Cursuswalker is a practising but non-believing pagan/wiccan. http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... t=solstice

[Thumpalumpacus]

I apologize Thumpalumpacus. Rereading my comment, that last sentence does come off fairly snarky. I didn't not intend it that way and I'm sorry.

No prob, I prefer cool conversation myself and I can see you're a little irritated. I don't want to add to it, so I'll just say that my atheism is only in relation to supernatural deities. My atheism arises frommy acceptance of reason and evidence as the basis for factual claims, so I do reject afterlives etc; but that rejection is not because of my faithlessness. It's a small distinction, but it's there.

[FBM]

Yeah, man/most Buddhists believe in a lot of supernatural shit, but not a supreme creator deity.

Andrew, I don't know enough about apophenia's beliefs to comment on what she meant. However, quoting the dictionary is relevant. The etymology of a word gives its original intended meaning, which in this case, has nothing to do with the supernatural at large beyond one specific instance of it, belief in the existence of a deity. Public languages are conventionally coded meaning systems, and definitions are publicly decided upon. I don't have a problem if you propose your preferred private definition on the word 'atheist', but if you assert that the publicly agreed-upon meaning is different from what the public asserts, it's hard to see how you aren't simply wrong on that point. Let me reiterate, though, I don't have any complaint about you having a private definition of the word. I agree that any belief in the supernatural is inferior to a total lack of belief in it, in the sense that it's less intellectually rigorous. But that doesn't make the people inferior, IMO.

[Robert_S]

I wish there were a dash in the word. I think when people see "a-theist" they're a lot less confused. It seems sometimes people hear "athe-ist".

[amused]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... l-mencken/

Why I am an atheist – HL Mencken

Not really — if HL Mencken wrote a letter for the “Why I am an atheist” series, I’d really have to reconsider the whole premise. But Mencken was asked by Will Durant to answer the question, “What is the meaning of life?” in 1927, and his reply would fit in pretty well here.

...

As for religion, I am quite devoid of it. Never in my adult life have I experienced anything that could be plausibly called a religious impulse. My father and grandfather were agnostics before me, and though I was sent to Sunday-school as a boy and exposed to the Christian theology I was never taught to believe it. My father thought that I should learn what it was, but it apparently never occurred to him that I would accept it. He was a good psychologist. What I got in Sunday-school—beside a wide acquaintance with Christian hymnology—was simply a firm conviction that the Christian faith was full of palpable absurdities, and the Christian God preposterous. Since that time I have read a great deal in theology—perhaps much more than the average clergyman—but I have never discovered any reason to change my mind.

The act of worship, as carried on by Christians, seems to me to be debasing rather than ennobling. It involves grovelling before a Being who, if He really exists, deserves to be denounced instead of respected. I see little evidence in this world of the so-called goodness of God. On the contrary, it seems to me that, on the strength of His daily acts, He must be set down a most cruel, stupid and villainous fellow. I can say this with a clear conscience, for He has treated me very well—in fact, with vast politeness. But I can’t help thinking of his barbaric torture of most of the rest of humanity. I simply can’t imagine revering the God of war and politics, theology and cancer.

I do not believe in immortality, and have no desire for it. The belief in it issues from the puerile egos of inferior men. In its Christian form it is little more than a device for getting revenge upon those who are having a better time on this earth. What the meaning of human life may be I don’t know: I incline to suspect that it has none. All I know about it is that, to me at least, it is very amusing while it lasts. Even its troubles, indeed, can be amusing. Moreover, they tend to foster the human qualities that I admire most—courage and its analogues. The noblest man, I think, is that one who fights God, and triumphs over Him. I have had little of this to do. When I die I shall be content to vanish into nothingness. No show, however good, could conceivably be good for ever.

Sincerely yours,

H. L. Mencken