Is There More to Atheism than Lack of Belief?

[ToddNotTodd]

There is less.

Pithy, but of course, false...

 

[Gadarene]

So we were getting stuck on "necessity" versus "effects".

I think atheism causes certain views and philosophies to come about and thus atheists are statistically more likely to hold certain views.

However, there is nothing "required" of an atheist beyond lack of belief in god(s) (which is just the definition of atheism...). It seems a silly question though. Of course there is nothing required of atheism beyond the definition of atheism...just like there's nothing "required" of a Christian beyond the definition of Christian.

The issue is when Christians speak of one definitive, singular Atheist Worldview.

There simply isn't one to speak of.

 

[pyramid33]

Pithy, but of course, false...

OOooooo. Prove it.

 

[Ken-1122]

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to demonize anyone.

Labels, generalizations and stereotypes are actually really useful because as humans, we don't have time to get to know each person we interact with on a personal level. Evolution has taught us to make quick judgments about a person and we do it constantly all the time. Its also a way to categorize people so we can remember them.

That is called "Prejustice" and there is a reason this behavior is villified.

"Generalizations" and "stereotypes" are seen as a terrible thing it seems, especially on this forum. People get all upset if you stereotype them...even if the person doing the stereotyping is correct!

Atheist: "I'm an atheist."
Me: "Oh, so you're likely politically liberal because that's a fairly statistically reasonable assumption."
Atheist: "Don't stereotype me! Not all atheists are liberal you know!"
Me: "Oh my bad, so you're conservative?"
Atheist: "No...no I'm liberal."

How about this one?

Prejustice person: Black women tend to be single mothers on welfare
Black Mother: Don't judge me, not all black women are on welfare
Prejustice person: Oh my bad! So you are not on welfare?
Black Mother: Well.... actually I am.

Just because you run into someone who is this way doesn't mean they all are. That's why it is necessary to talk to people rather than prejudging them.

I don't know. I think labels are useful because they can give you a lot of information very quickly. If someone tells you they are a Christian, that gives you a lot of information about what they likely believe. You might be wrong, but at least it gives you some information as to where to place your reference point.

I think the same goes with atheism. And that's why I said there's more to atheism than just lack of belief. If someone tells me they are an atheist, that gives me a reference point and lot of information about what they are likely to agree or disagree with. Sure, I might be wrong and there is always nuance as each individual is unique.

You can't compare the two. With Christianity there is a book that tells them what to believe and what not to believe; in theory all you need to do is read the book. There is no such book for atheism.

And if someone doesn't want a label (and the associated stereotypes attached), then don't use the label.

I don't use the term "atheist" to discribe myself, I use the term "skeptic" but because many christians are also skeptics and they don't want to confuse; everybody wants to label me an atheist because I don't believe in God.

Ken

 

[Gadarene]

I can only answer your question with another question: why don't you spend half your day discounting leprechauns, square circles, puppy-kittens, and intelligent Sarah Palins?

What makes you think I don't?

To some degree it's a matter of personal interest in the intricacies of the debate in question - I did do the anticreationism/antipseudoscience debates for a long time as well as criticising theism, but they kinda bore me now; now I still criticism theism but my latest bete noire is feminism.

Again, you are not being uniquely singled out here.

I think they do, and I don't need to pull any no-true-atheist cards because it's mostly a matter of implicit behavior, not explicitly stated ideology. Few atheists (but not none) are going to be like, "well, yeah, atheism also means being reasonable," but plenty more atheists are going to associate themselves with rationalism, scientism, whatever without distinguishing this from their atheism.

If it's implicit, how do you actually know they are doing this? This is why I am asking you for concrete evidence. If you don't have this then you are doing nothing more than speculating.

And I would also call that rather silly, no matter how much time you have frittered on formulating that view.

 

[Ken-1122]

OOooooo. Prove it.

A Theist is a person who believes in God/Gods. When you put an "A" in front of the word it means "non" example; typial vs atypical. Atypical simply means it is not typical. Atheist simply means not a theist.

Ken

 

[ToddNotTodd]

OOooooo. Prove it.

Ok...

You said atheism is less than a disbelief in a god. But since the definition of atheism is in fact a disbelief in a god it's equal, not less.

So you're wrong.

 

[Senator Cheese]

Well, to be fair, you're correct: atheism by itself means you don't believe in any higher deity.

That, however, supposes that you do not believe because you feel there is no reason to believe, because there is no evidence. This, in essence, presupposes a naturalist worldview - that is to say that you only believe things for which there is evidence, which in essence negates any possibility for true altruistic behavior.

Then again, most atheists I know do adhere to some moral code or do hold some moral dogma, which is pretty nice to see. It's just as irrational as a belief in a higher deity (there is no "evidence" for objective morals). I guess you could say that atheism is often marketed as "rational" (naturalist) but most atheists are just as irrational as any religious folk are.

Ugh, I digress. Anyway, I hope you can understand what I was trying to get at, even if the text may not be very comprehensible.

 

[Gadarene]

Well, to be fair, you're correct: atheism by itself means you don't believe in any higher deity.

That, however, supposes that you do not believe because you feel there is no reason to believe, because there is no evidence. This, in essence, presupposes a naturalist worldview

No, it doesn't. It is a conclusion, not a presupposition.

- that is to say that you only believe things for which there is evidence, which in essence negates any possibility for true altruistic behavior.

Wrong. Are you claiming that there is no evidence altruistic behaviour exists or no good nontheist arguments for it? That would be rather inadvisable.

Then again, most atheists I know do adhere to some moral code or do hold some moral dogma, which is pretty nice to see. It's just as irrational as a belief in a higher deity (there is no "evidence" for objective morals). I guess you could say that atheism is often marketed as "rational" (naturalist) but most atheists are just as irrational as any religious folk are.

Ugh, I digress. Anyway, I hope you can understand what I was trying to get at, even if the text may not be very comprehensible.

Your misunderstanding of atheism is quite clear.

 

[Ken-1122]

Well, to be fair, you're correct: atheism by itself means you don't believe in any higher deity.

That, however, supposes that you do not believe because you feel there is no reason to believe, because there is no evidence. This, in essence, presupposes a naturalist worldview - that is to say that you only believe things for which there is evidence, which in essence negates any possibility for true altruistic behavior.

I will bet I can list a lot of things you don’t believe because you feel there is no reason to believe, or because there is no evidence; does this mean you have a naturalist worldview?

Then again, most atheists I know do adhere to some moral code or do hold some moral dogma, which is pretty nice to see. It's just as irrational as a belief in a higher deity

How do you equate living to a moral code to believing in a higher deity?

(there is no "evidence" for objective morals)

True! Morals are subjective, not objective.

I guess you could say that atheism is often marketed as "rational" (naturalist) but most atheists are just as irrational as any religious folk are.

Who “markets” atheism?

Ugh, I digress. Anyway, I hope you can understand what I was trying to get at, even if the text may not be very comprehensible.

I think I understood your point; I may not agree with everything, but I got your message none the less

Ken

 

[toolmanjantzi]

The short answer....no. The longer answer is a bit more complicated than that. There's a tendency I've seen from christians on CF that is quite ridiculous. Every atheist who has been posting for more than a week knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's the tendency that some christians have to explain what they think the "atheist worldview" or "atheist belief system" or more incredibly the "atheist religion" entails. It's really quite astounding...so I'm going to help out all those christians who think they understand what those things are. They're myths. They're crutches. They are works of fiction that christians (and other religions, of course) have created in order to wrap their minds around something they don't understand...namely atheism. I'm going to let all of you know a little secret right now, coming straight from the mouth of an "insider" who's been an atheist since before he was thirteen...there is no "atheist worldview". None. It doesn't exist. In fact, and you may want to sit down for this part, the label "atheist" itself is almost entirely meaningless. "Atheist" describes exactly one thing about me...and it's something that I don't believe. Think on that for a moment. It tells you nothing about what I do believe, it just tells you that I don't believe in god...that's all. Could you imagine if we had labels for everything you don't believe in? A-unicornist, a-vampirest, a-boogeymanist and so-on and so-on. We would end up with countless labels that we could stick to anyone and it wouldn't really tell you anything about them. Don't believe me? I could drop the label atheist right now and it wouldn't affect the way I perceive myself at all. I could never use the term "atheist" again and it wouldn't change a thing about me. If someone were to ask, "Do you believe in god?" or some similar question I could simply answer "no" and I haven't lost anything even though I don't identify as an atheist anymore. That's not really something you can do as a christian or muslim or jew because so many other beliefs and views and traditions are attached to the labels you have for your religion. Nothing is attached to atheism though...nothing. I know about now some of you are saying, "What about humanism/naturalism/rationalism/communism/secularism/empiricism/etc/etc....?" What about them? I honestly couldn't define any of those terms if you put a gun to my head. I have a few vague notions of a few of them...but I don't ascribe to any of those beliefs entirely...nor do I really care. None of them have anything to do with atheism. None of them have anything to do with my lack of belief in god. I hope this clears up some things for those of you whom I keep seeing make the mistake of attaching other beliefs to atheism. You're wrong and you should stop. If in the future I see you doing this, I will be linking you to this thread and I would encourage any atheists to do the same. For the sake of discussion, I'll always consider the possibility that I'm wrong. If you feel this OP is mistaken somehow, and that the answer to the title is "yes"....please explain. I would love to see it. Thanks for reading.

Did you say you don't believe? In what?

 

[andy b]

OOooooo. Prove it.

lol

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

The issue is when Christians speak of one definitive, singular Atheist Worldview.

There simply isn't one to speak of.

And do you think there is one for Christians?

No group of millions of people is going to have "one definitive, singular" worldview, right?


So, I ask you, what do you think purpose of the label is?

For example, you used the word "Christian" in your quote above…why did you use that label there. Why was it a useful word choice in that sentence? What do you mean by "Christian"?

Because a label, by its very nature, must generalize and simplify a complex human being down to something easier to swallow. Labels are the only way we can communicate with each other.

How would you prefer the word "atheist" to be used? Does the label have a use? How could someone use it in a sentence that wouldn't bug you?

 

[Gadarene]

And do you think there is one for Christians? No group of millions of people is going to have "one definitive, singular" worldview, right?

Exactly. It is foolish to treat all Christians as homogeneous, just like it is dumb to think there is The Atheist Worldview, just like it is dumb to think Muslims are terrorists.

So, I ask you, what do you think purpose of the label is? For example, you used the word "Christian" in your quote above...why did you use that label there. Why was it a useful word choice in that sentence? What do you mean by "Christian"?

Followers of Christ.

Because a label, by its very nature, must generalize and simplify a complex human being down to something easier to swallow. Labels are the only way we can communicate with each other.

Alternatively it may simply refer to a simple commonality. In the case of atheism, which is just one point and one only, that happens by default.

How would you prefer the word "atheist" to be used? Does the label have a use? How could someone use it in a sentence that wouldn't bug you?

An atheist is someone who lacks belief in deities.

 

[Ken-1122]

I know this was not addressed to me, but I just had to reply

And do you think there is one for Christians?

No group of millions of people is going to have "one definitive, singular" worldview, right?

Christians should have a world view that is in line with what is written in the bible. The fact that their views differ from person to person is shortcoming of the religion

So, I ask you, what do you think purpose of the label is?

Unfortunately a label is often used as a means of prejudging someone without going through the trouble of getting to know them and gaining accurate information on them

For example, you used the word "Christian" in your quote above…why did you use that label there. Why was it a useful word choice in that sentence? What do you mean by "Christian"?

You seem to be forgetting, Christians have a book called the Bible that tells what Christians are supposed to believe. Atheists don’t have such a book

How would you prefer the word "atheist" to be used? Does the label have a use? How could someone use it in a sentence that wouldn't bug you?

As a default position. A means of describing what you are not, rather than what you are

K

 

[Eudaimonist]

how many atheists reject belief in God but nonetheless believe in ghosts, extrasensory perception, or an afterlife? Almost none.

False. Plenty of New Agers are atheists, even if they don't flaunt that label.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

For example, if someone tells me they are an atheist, I could probably make the reasonable assumption that they:
-reject supernatural claims and believe in only natural phenomena as explanations
-believe in secular government
-do not highly value any religious texts
-are politically liberal or left-leaning
-are pro-choice
-value higher education
-value the scientific method
-believe that we make our own purpose
-believe morality is not objective but is either the product of evolution or is ultimately relativistic
-believe in evolution as a meta-narrative to how we came to be human
-do not believe in a soul
-etc.

Whatever trends may exist, they have nothing to do with atheism.

I'm fully an atheist, but I am on the economic right, believe that morality has an objective aspect, am difficult to define as either pro-life or pro-choice, value science but not to the point of scientism, and believe that we don't create our own purposes so much as discover the ones that matter to us. I am no less an atheist for that. So what if I buck a trend? The trend does not define what atheism is.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

Speaking of atheism as a worldview makes just as little sense as speaking of theism as a worldview.

It is obvious that theism is a collection of different worldviews, which may share trends but are actually distinctly different worldviews united in essence only by their agreement that divine beings exist. Such is true of atheistic worldviews, except the agreement here is that there is no belief that divine beings exist.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Huntun]

that is to say that you only believe things for which there is evidence, which in essence negates any possibility for true altruistic behavior.

Why do you say that? I believe there is good evidence pointing to the existence of behavior and attitudes that are normally deemed altruistic. I sometimes feel said attitudes myself.

there is no "evidence" for objective morals)

A person can be a skeptic about the "objectivity" of morals and still behave in an altruistic and compassionate manner. Personally I do so because I will to. I will to because I believe it leads to my own flourishing as well as the benefit of others. Because it's in my nature to feel empathy the benefit of others is something I take into consideration as well as my own flourishing. Objective, subjective, intersubjective/ societal, etc... all not too important in that regard. I will continue doing so regardless of where morality is grounded or not grounded.

 

[babylonisfalling]

The short answer....no.

The longer answer is a bit more complicated than that. There's a tendency I've seen from christians on CF that is quite ridiculous. Every atheist who has been posting for more than a week knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's the tendency that some christians have to explain what they think the "atheist worldview" or "atheist belief system" or more incredibly the "atheist religion" entails. It's really quite astounding...so I'm going to help out all those christians who think they understand what those things are.

They're myths. They're crutches. They are works of fiction that christians (and other religions, of course) have created in order to wrap their minds around something they don't understand...namely atheism. I'm going to let all of you know a little secret right now, coming straight from the mouth of an "insider" who's been an atheist since before he was thirteen...there is no "atheist worldview". None. It doesn't exist. In fact, and you may want to sit down for this part, the label "atheist" itself is almost entirely meaningless. "Atheist" describes exactly one thing about me...and it's something that I don't believe. Think on that for a moment. It tells you nothing about what I do believe, it just tells you that I don't believe in god...that's all. Could you imagine if we had labels for everything you don't believe in? A-unicornist, a-vampirest, a-boogeymanist and so-on and so-on. We would end up with countless labels that we could stick to anyone and it wouldn't really tell you anything about them.

Don't believe me? I could drop the label atheist right now and it wouldn't affect the way I perceive myself at all. I could never use the term "atheist" again and it wouldn't change a thing about me. If someone were to ask, "Do you believe in god?" or some similar question I could simply answer "no" and I haven't lost anything even though I don't identify as an atheist anymore. That's not really something you can do as a christian or muslim or jew because so many other beliefs and views and traditions are attached to the labels you have for your religion. Nothing is attached to atheism though...nothing.

I know about now some of you are saying, "What about humanism/naturalism/rationalism/communism/secularism/empiricism/etc/etc....?" What about them? I honestly couldn't define any of those terms if you put a gun to my head. I have a few vague notions of a few of them...but I don't ascribe to any of those beliefs entirely...nor do I really care. None of them have anything to do with atheism. None of them have anything to do with my lack of belief in god.

I hope this clears up some things for those of you whom I keep seeing make the mistake of attaching other beliefs to atheism. You're wrong and you should stop. If in the future I see you doing this, I will be linking you to this thread and I would encourage any atheists to do the same.

For the sake of discussion, I'll always consider the possibility that I'm wrong. If you feel this OP is mistaken somehow, and that the answer to the title is "yes"....please explain. I would love to see it. Thanks for reading.

Atheist is not the lack of belief in God. It involves an thought out decision you've made that there is no God. An atheist actively rejects the notion that God exists.

They are trying very hard to run away from that definition though.