How do you choose to believe?

[Albion]

As the old saw has it, 'Not believing in God is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby'

Well, that might be true IF the atheist had no other values. That's what the analogy suggests--that disbelieving in a god is the equivalent of not engaging in a hobby, pastime, etc.

The idea that was discussed here was not that, however, but the fact that atheists do indeed have some other value system that amounts to a religion but sans a deity. What's more, when the value system is focused on ethics or morals, there ARE such organizations that have membership meetings to engage in doing what most of what any church does, even though the existence of God is not part of it. And they are normally included in reference works along with (other) church bodies.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Well, that might be true IF the atheist had no other values. That's what the analogy suggests--that disbelieving in a god is the equivalent of not engaging in a hobby, pastime, etc.

The idea that was discussed here was not that, however, but the fact that atheists do indeed have some other value system that amounts to a religion but sans a deity. What's more, when the value system is focused on ethics or morals, there ARE such organizations that have membership meetings to engage in doing what most of what any church does, even though the existence of God is not part of it. And they are normally included in reference works along with (other) church bodies.

A value system is not equivalent to a religion. Having values merely makes one human, not necessarily religious.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Don't be so outraged. If there is no belief in a god, all the rest that constitutes a religion can still remain, and in the case of most people (and as another atheist poster pointed out) it does. Something else that's of ultimate value to the person is substituted, that's all.

I'd like to second Chris B's request for some examples of what you mean. Most of the people I know are non-religious atheists and I don't know of any who have beliefs or practices that could reasonably be seen as substituting for a belief in God, or religious practices in general. Their values are the common human ones of respect, honesty, love, loyalty, and so-on, for family, friends, community, etc.

 

[grasping the after wind]

As the old saw has it, 'Not believing in God is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby'

That is a misunderstanding of Albion's point. He does not mean that atheism is the religion of atheists from what I can see, but is saying that most atheists will cling to a type of religion that suits them placing something other than a Supreme Being at the center of their religious world view and giving the same sort of reverence to whatever that might be ( the collective consciousness, science, the common good, the furtherance of knowledge etc.) as a theist gives to their God. For the theist, God is the ultimate good and central figure in their universe, for the atheist it is not usually atheism( though there are the rare cases ) but some other greater good that they assign preeminence to.

 

[grasping the after wind]

A value system is not equivalent to a religion, however. Having values merely makes one human, not necessarily religious.

Values come from a world view that one espouses and subjecting oneself to a determination of what is good and evil by consulting a world view even if it is a self constructed world view is a religious sort of thing. If one was to be amoral then one might find a way to be completely irreligious but to hold to any moral code makes one somewhat religious as one must put faith in something to believe that good and evil exist. Where there is faith there is likely to be religion.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The idea that was discussed here was not that, however, but the fact that atheists do indeed have some other value system that amounts to a religion but sans a deity.

Ah, OK; that's true if you broaden the conventional use of 'religion' to encompass personal and cultural moral & ethical values in general, but that makes all people religious, and loses the distinction between normative morals & ethics and organized systems of belief. I don't think you'll find many philosophers who'd consider that a valid or useful extension of the meaning.

What's more, when the value system is focused on ethics or morals, there ARE such organizations that have membership meetings to engage in doing what most of what any church does, even though the existence of God is not part of it. And they are normally included in reference works along with (other) church bodies.

If you're talking about organizations like the Freemasons or similar, I'll agree that they have some similarities to religious organizations, although they're not generally considered as such; but they're a tiny minority - not representative of atheism in general. Or did you have some other organizations in mind?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Values come from a world view that one espouses and subjecting oneself to a determination of what is good and evil by consulting a world view even if it is a self constructed world view is a religious sort of thing.

Only if one dilutes the word "religious" to the point where it signifies nothing more than the basic human tendency to form values. Given the supernatural baggage that comes along with the word "religious," it would be irresponsible to call the mere act of valuing "religion." That some acquire values through religion does not imply that all values must, as a rule, originate from within religion or that the mere act of valuing is itself intrinsically religious.

If one was to be amoral then one might find a way to be completely irreligious but to hold to any moral code makes one somewhat religious

No, once again, valuing is a human activity, not a religious activity per se.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

You would also have to assume that all atheists adhere to a similar set of values that could be classified as 'atheist' values, if you want to claim that a religion is based on shared values not a shared belief in the supernatural.
Otherwise you could claim that being a Packers fan, say, is a religion. ..there's ritual, getting together to share experiences, etc.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That is a misunderstanding of Albion's point. He does not mean that atheism is the religion of atheists from what I can see, but is saying that most atheists will cling to a type of religion that suits them placing something other than a Supreme Being at the center of their religious world view and giving the same sort of reverence to whatever that might be ( the collective consciousness, science, the common good, the furtherance of knowledge etc.) as a theist gives to their God. For the theist, God is the ultimate good and central figure in their universe, for the atheist it is not usually atheism( though there are the rare cases ) but some other greater good that they assign preeminence to.

I don't recognise this description. I don't see the atheists I know valuing 'the collective consciousness, science, the common good, the furtherance of knowledge etc.' as the 'ultimate good' or putting such things at the centre of their universe. They have morals, values, interests, and hobbies; if you ask them what they value above all else, they'll probably say family or friends; if you ask them what they'd wish for if they could have anything, they'll probably say 'world peace', but that's not the at centre of their universe.

 

[Chriliman]

I haven't ignored the doubts, I managed to work through them. My issue, more precisely, was believing the Bible 100% (I've always been an inerrantist). Ironically enough, I was writing my Master's thesis on the New Testament promises and came across a few that I couldn't reconcile with my understanding of reality (e.g., if someone has the faith of a mustard seed they'll be able to move mountains). After years of struggle, I finally concluded that my understanding of the Bible in these few instances must be incorrect. (I never have finished my thesis, so I'm still 60 pages short of having that degree :-(.)

I think belief is a complex process. It combines what we've been taught, what we actually know, our emotions, consequences of the belief, and physical & non-physical data. Each of these elements has a weight associated with it, and when they're all mashed together you come up with a belief. I don't know how it all works, but, back to the OP, I do think we all choose to believe.

I think what the atheists are trying to get at is that we have no choice but to believe something. We're designed to believe(thanks to evolution, according to atheists), but what we believe is completely up to us and how we interpret our reality. This is a perfect design if you're wanting to build lasting relationships based in truth.

Apparently, according to atheists, evolution wanted to build a relationship with us based in truth, which is why it designed us to have no choice but to believe something. Or evolution doesn't care about us and just randomly designed us to have no choice but to believe something, which would mean it really doesn't matter what we believe.

Or, God designed us to have no choice but to believe something so that we could figure out the truth for ourselves and build a relationship with Him based in truth because He is the truth. Of course this makes more sense, but very difficult for a free willed being to accept as true.

 

[Dmitri Martila]

difficult for a free willed being to accept as true.

Christian: "we have no choice, but to love the God like the pets love us. Where is Freewill then?"
Me:
Define the freewill. Certainly you will not find it in the confused agnostical Science. So everyone (and atheist) agrees with Christian definition, because there is no alternative definition. Definition of theists: Freewill is gift from God.

 

[durangodawood]

As the old saw has it, 'Not believing in God is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby'

I would go further and say: 'Not believing in God is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a religion.'

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Values come from a world view that one espouses and subjecting oneself to a determination of what is good and evil by consulting a world view even if it is a self constructed world view is a religious sort of thing. If one was to be amoral then one might find a way to be completely irreligious but to hold to any moral code makes one somewhat religious as one must put faith in something to believe that good and evil exist. Where there is faith there is likely to be religion.

It's certainly true that in many societies, cultural moral and ethical value norms directly derive from those of the predominant religion, but it's equally true that many of the same values can be derived from the basic requirements of successful social co-operation in small groups (many social animals show the rudiments of moral behaviour), and more advanced reflective social self-awareness gives rise to principles such as the Golden Rule (ethic of reciprocity). It seems to me that, in developing, religions have adopted, refined, and extended these pre-existing moral primitives.

There are also a number of explicitly rational non-religious moral & ethical philosophies and associated movements, such as secular humanism, consequentialist philosophies (e.g. utilitarianism), Freethinking, etc.

To put all these under the umbrella of religion is to seriously muddy the philosophical and semantic waters, and open the door to all sorts of confusing equivocation.

 

[Chriliman]

Christian: "we have no choice, but to love the God like the pets love us. Where is Freewill then?"
Me:
Define the freewill. Certainly you will not find it in the confused agnostical Science. So everyone (and atheist) agrees with Christian definition, because there is no alternative definition. Definition of theists: Freewill is gift from God.

Right, God created us in His image. He has free will, so He created us to have free will, the problem is that we are free to not accept Him, but He only does what is right and true. If someone rejects what is right and true, it will not end well for them.

God bless!

 

[Albion]

A value system is not equivalent to a religion.

That is true, but it doesn't change anything. Let's call it something else if you prefer not to use "value system."

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Define the freewill. Certainly you will not find it in the confused agnostical Science. So everyone (and atheist) agrees with Christian definition, because there is no alternative definition.

You seem unaware of the range of compatibilist formulations of free will (i.e. compatible with determinism, non-dualistic, coherent) ...

 

[Albion]

That is a misunderstanding of Albion's point. He does not mean that atheism is the religion of atheists from what I can see, but is saying that most atheists will cling to a type of religion that suits them placing something other than a Supreme Being at the center of their religious world view and giving the same sort of reverence to whatever that might be ( the collective consciousness, science, the common good, the furtherance of knowledge etc.) as a theist gives to their God. For the theist, God is the ultimate good and central figure in their universe, for the atheist it is not usually atheism( though there are the rare cases ) but some other greater good that they assign preeminence to.

Nicely said, "grasping." And it demonstrates that the point is entirely understandable.

 

[durangodawood]

You seem unaware of the range of compatibilist formulations of free will (i.e. compatible with determinism, non-dualistic, coherent) ...

Determinism is a vast overreach anyway. As if we know enough to be definitive about it.....

 

[Albion]

Ah, OK; that's true if you broaden the conventional use of 'religion' to encompass personal and cultural moral & ethical values in general, but that makes all people religious

Oh, I don't think we can go that far.

and loses the distinction between normative morals & ethics and organized systems of belief.

There's no reason to think that adherence to some set of morals or ethics "doesn't count," or, for that matter, that religion requires a highly organized institution.

If you're talking about organizations like the Freemasons or similar, I'll agree that they have some similarities to religious organizations, although they're not generally considered as such; but they're a tiny minority - not representative of atheism in general. Or did you have some other organizations in mind?

It wouldn't be Freemasonry, which isn't a religion at all. It merely calls members to BE religious in whatever church they choose, as many fraternal and/or patriotic societies do. I was referring to Unitarianism or what's called Ethical School or several other "non-religion religions" which include many or, in some cases, a majority of members who are definitely non-theists.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Atheist: "we are not pagans", "we believe to be not pagans". Me: "What error has my proof of pagan atheism then? You just say: Dima is wrong. It is not very informative. I am wrong in what place of the proof above?"
To atheist's reply: "It can be put short and simple, without lost of information: Dima is wrong. No else you have explained. Why are you not agnostic?! You must have the proof to come to atheism."

Lack of evidence where evidence is expected is evidence of absence.