Is There More to Atheism than Lack of Belief?

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Labeling a lack of belief an "ism" can be useful for ease of communication but can also lead to confusion. People then start thinking a lack of belief in something is an ideology.

Lack of belief in something still effects how you act.

Inaction is a type of action and it changes the outcome of events.

For example, if all the US soldiers in Iraq stopped believing the authority of the US government and laid down their arms, that lack of belief would certainly have had huge ramifications for geopolitics and US foreign policy.

I don't believe in the Islamic faith. If I did, I may find myself on a hajj pilgrimage at some point in my life. That lack of belief influences where I will be in time and space as well as who I interact with an meet. That lack of belief also likely influences how I think and how I view the world. It gives me different perspectives and ideologies on Islamic fundamentalism and Wahabism. It gives me different perspectives on US-Saudi relations. It perhaps changes my ideas about the public funding for the local mosque. It perhaps changes my ideologies about politicians depending if they appear pro-Islamic or anti-Islamic.

I don't think you realize how much a lack of belief in something can effect the world. Everything you don't believe in effects what you do.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Something strange. I didn't think I posted this on this thread but the other one. ???????? (I deleted it.)

A different thread? Which one?

 

[Chany]

Lack of belief in something still effects how you act.

Inaction is a type of action and it changes the outcome of events.

For example, if all the US soldiers in Iraq stopped believing the authority of the US government and laid down their arms, that lack of belief would certainly have had huge ramifications for geopolitics and US foreign policy.

I don't believe in the Islamic faith. If I did, I may find myself on a hajj pilgrimage at some point in my life. That lack of belief influences where I will be in time and space as well as who I interact with an meet. That lack of belief also likely influences how I think and how I view the world. It gives me different perspectives and ideologies on Islamic fundamentalism and Wahabism. It gives me different perspectives on US-Saudi relations. It perhaps changes my ideas about the public funding for the local mosque. It perhaps changes my ideologies about politicians depending if they appear pro-Islamic or anti-Islamic.

I don't think you realize how much a lack of belief in something can effect the world. Everything you don't believe in effects what you do.

But you're a theist. Therefore, you believe in Islam. It's the same thing as saying "you're an atheist, therefore you're liberal."

This is the thing with the point of an "atheist" worldview. Atheism is a part of a worldview and may inform and influence a person's beliefs. However, a person's atheism only tells you as much about what the person believes in the same way theism tells one about what a person actually believes.

The main thrust of saying that atheism is a belief system is that you can't tie one down to an "atheist" ideology, as there really isn't one. It's not saying disbelief in a deity has little impact upon a person's worldview.

 

[Huntun]

If I refrained from believing in Islam then I probably wouldn't go on a pilgrimage to Mecca. Sure, my behavior is likely to differ from the person who believes. That doesn't imply that everyone who refrains from believing in Islam should be classified as belonging to a special ideology called aislamism.

It would be like the "NOT collecting cards is your special hobby" statement.

 

[Gadarene]

For you and other reasonable and consistent atheists, the answer is no. But the moment you start advocating for your atheism, it then by definition becomes something positive. I distinguish between negative and positive atheism: the former where you don't believe in any deities, period; the latter where you don't believe in any deities and package this ideologically with other stuff, e.g., atheism as "rational", "scientific," "realistic," etc.

Which, to remind everyone, is not the typical definition of positive/negative atheism.

Stances may correlate for many people without one guaranteeing the other. As I've said multiple times before here, I've never even seen a No-True-Atheist fallacy. Seen more No-True-Christian fallacies than I could count.

 

[Gadarene]

Is it theoretically possible? Sure. As I said in my post, there are always outliers to a group that don't fit into nice categories. But one outlier doesn't falsify the general trend.

A trend however doesn't alter the definition of what atheism is, nor does it mean the traits you mention necessarily follow from atheism.

There may be somewhere an atheist who believes in the supernatural, wants more religious involvement in government, values religious texts highly, is a right-wing Republican, is pro-life, and does not value university degrees; who does not value science and believes purpose is endowed authoritatively by something (but not god(s)); who believes morality is objective and given objectively by something (but not god(s)); who does not believe in evolution but believes some other (non-scientific) idea because he doesn't value science.

Sure. That person could theoretically exist.

And there could also be a teapot orbiting the sun between Mars and Earth.

And they would still be atheists, which is the point. None of the things you have mentioned change that. That doesn't mean atheism requires you to be left-wing, pro-life, etc. Such identifications evidently transcend the theist/atheist divide.

But if we're just going to stereotype, then Christians are gay-bashers.

My evidence? Meh, a lot of you are. Apparently that's good enough for some.

 

[Gadarene]

Anyhoo - there are a few things that might follow from atheism depending on the deity in question. A common one is the idea that morality, meaning can only be obtained from a deity. Anything a particular theist looks exclusively to a god to define will be rejected.

Silly things like "leftwing prolifer hurrdurr", however, do not apply here.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Anyhoo - there are a few things that might follow from atheism depending on the deity in question. A common one is the idea that morality, meaning can only be obtained from a deity. Anything a particular theist looks exclusively to a god to define will be rejected.

Silly things like "leftwing prolifer hurrdurr", however, do not apply here.

Wouldn't that be rightwing, not leftwing? Left wing is liberal. Being pro life is generally viewed as conservative.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

A different thread? Which one?

"Why are Atheists so disliked."

 

[Gadarene]

Wouldn't that be rightwing, not leftwing? Left wing is liberal. Being pro life is generally viewed as conservative.

Hurrdurr indeed

Prochoicer then, I trust you lot to find and replace

 

[Ana the Ist]

Is it theoretically possible? Sure. As I said in my post, there are always outliers to a group that don't fit into nice categories. But one outlier doesn't falsify the general trend.

There may be somewhere an atheist who believes in the supernatural, wants more religious involvement in government, values religious texts highly, is a right-wing Republican, is pro-life, and does not value university degrees; who does not value science and believes purpose is endowed authoritatively by something (but not god(s)); who believes morality is objective and given objectively by something (but not god(s)); who does not believe in evolution but believes some other (non-scientific) idea because he doesn't value science.

Sure. That person could theoretically exist.

And there could also be a teapot orbiting the sun between Mars and Earth.

I'm guessing you've never heard of S. E. Cupp?

Maybe you missed my point, maybe you didn't and I'm missing your point. We can assume all sorts of things about people based upon their label...but unless the assumption is actually connected to the label in some way, that assumption is baseless. Your experiences with atheists in general and "trends" you think you've noticed about atheists in general may or may not be true of the atheist you meet for the first time tomorrow because those assumptions/trends have nothing at all to do with atheism. For example...

I've noticed most christians I've met happen to be taller than 5'1". Is this a true statement? Absolutely. Does it have anything to do with christians or christianity? No. Neither do the things you listed in your first post have anything to do with atheism.

It's a lot different from making a statement like, "christians believe Jesus is their personal savior." That's a direct statement about the beliefs of christians that ties directly to christianity. There is no such thing for atheism.

 

[Huntun]

I claim there is a magical gnome named svirfneblin that grants wishes if you close your right eye, make a peace sign with both hands, jump up and down, and twerk while chanting meccalekka high meccahighkneeho.

Does this mean that everyone who doesn't believe in svirfneblin now adheres to an ideology known as asvirfneblinism?

The behavior of believers and non believers will probably be different. I mean what non believer is likely to do the chant thingy for wishes?

 

[Gadarene]

I'm guessing you've never heard of S. E. Cupp?

Sipp E. Cupp!

Maybe you missed my point, maybe you didn't and I'm missing your point. We can assume all sorts of things about people based upon their label...but unless the assumption is actually connected to the label in some way, that assumption is baseless. Your experiences with atheists in general and "trends" you think you've noticed about atheists in general may or may not be true of the atheist you meet for the first time tomorrow because those assumptions/trends have nothing at all to do with atheism. For example...

I've noticed most christians I've met happen to be taller than 5'1". Is this a true statement? Absolutely. Does it have anything to do with christians or christianity? No. Neither do the things you listed in your first post have anything to do with atheism.

They might have liked toast for breakfast, so liking toast must surely be a Christian belief.

It's a lot different from making a statement like, "christians believe Jesus is their personal savior." That's a direct statement about the beliefs of christians that ties directly to christianity. There is no such thing for atheism.

This.

I've seen plenty of atheists claim that atheists who don't agree with them politically are idiots or whatever. Which is still dumb, but it's never painted as a sign of them not being atheists.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

The main thrust of saying that atheism is a belief system is that you can't tie one down to an "atheist" ideology, as there really isn't one. It's not saying disbelief in a deity has little impact upon a person's worldview.

To me, these two sentences contradict one another.

In the second sentence you are saying that disbelief in a deity has an impact upon a person's worldview.

Thus, collectively, a group of people that all share that disbelief in a deity are likely to be impacted in similar ways and thus converge to somewhat similar worldviews.

And to me, "worldview" and "ideology" are very similar concepts. So an atheist worldview and an atheist ideology are similar concepts as well.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

A trend however doesn't alter the definition of what atheism is, nor does it mean the traits you mention necessarily follow from atheism.

Yea, and I said in my first post in this thread that, by a very strict and semantic definition of atheist, there is nothing beyond atheism except lack of belief.

But what I am saying is that, in our society and on this forum and in the "real world" (beyond semantic definitions), language operates in such a way that there is more attached to the word "atheism" than simply lack of belief.

You may not like that these other things are attached to it, but along with atheism comes some pretty common ideological beliefs like:

-naturalism
-politically left-leaning
-believe in secular government
-do not highly value any religious texts
-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

And they would still be atheists, which is the point. None of the things you have mentioned change that. That doesn't mean atheism requires you to be left-wing, pro-life, etc. Such identifications evidently transcend the theist/atheist divide.

Again, yes, in some theoretical world such a person could exist that fulfills this idealized, semantic definition.

But, as I said, in the "real world", language operates in such a way where other things are attached to the word atheism, whether you like it or not.

And this is just a basic induction. No atheist I have ever met fulfills all those traits listed, thus it seems reasonable to assume that no atheist exists that fulfills those traits.

I would change my position if I met an atheist like that.

But if we're just going to stereotype, then Christians are gay-bashers.

My evidence? Meh, a lot of you are. Apparently that's good enough for some.

I'm not simply stereotyping. I think certain aspects of this follow directly from atheism.

Naturalism follows from atheism quite..naturally. Because atheism does not believe in a god and, historically in the West, the supernatural has closely been related to God. Thus, it seems reasonable for atheists to tend to reject supernaturalism along with God.

Secular government seems to follow from atheism. Because atheism is not associated with religion so separation of church and state serves an atheists interests politically.

Moral relativism seems to follow from atheism. Because atheism does not believe in a god-figure which lays down objective moral laws. It seems more reasonable for an atheist to believe that morals are simply the result of evolution or human constructions because...where else could they come from?

These causes are not just random correlations to me.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I'm guessing you've never heard of S. E. Cupp?

Never heard of her. But a quick look at Wikipedia shows that she does not want more religious involvement in the government. So she fails to satisfy the list of qualities that I gave.

A teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars is as likely as finding an atheist that satisfies all the qualities I gave in that list.

Maybe you missed my point, maybe you didn't and I'm missing your point. We can assume all sorts of things about people based upon their label...but unless the assumption is actually connected to the label in some way, that assumption is baseless. Your experiences with atheists in general and "trends" you think you've noticed about atheists in general may or may not be true of the atheist you meet for the first time tomorrow because those assumptions/trends have nothing at all to do with atheism. For example...

I've noticed most christians I've met happen to be taller than 5'1". Is this a true statement? Absolutely. Does it have anything to do with christians or christianity? No. Neither do the things you listed in your first post have anything to do with atheism.

I disagree. From my post to Gadarene:

"Naturalism follows from atheism quite..naturally. Because atheism does not believe in a god and, historically in the West, the supernatural has closely been related to God. Thus, it seems reasonable for atheists to tend to reject supernaturalism along with God.

Secular government seems to follow from atheism. Because atheism is not associated with religion so separation of church and state serves an atheists interests politically.

Moral relativism seems to follow from atheism. Because atheism does not believe in a god-figure which lays down objective moral laws. It seems more reasonable for an atheist to believe that morals are simply the result of evolution or human constructions because...where else could they come from?"

All the ideologies and beliefs I have listed in previous posts, I think naturally follow from atheism. Or perhaps atheism naturally follows from them.

Either way, they are closely related (even if the direction of causality is fuzzy). They are far more related than the height of a person and their religious beliefs.

It's a lot different from making a statement like, "christians believe Jesus is their personal savior." That's a direct statement about the beliefs of christians that ties directly to christianity. There is no such thing for atheism.

To me, all you've done is define Christianity.

We can define words, sure. But your thread isn't about definitions.

You asked, "Is there more to atheism than lack of belief?"

Christianity is defined as the group that believe that Jesus died and rose again as their personal savior. Is there more to Christianity than that? Yes! Plenty more, there's a ton of philosophies and metaphysical frameworks and philosophical baggage that comes along with that.

Same goes for atheism in my mind.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I claim there is a magical gnome named svirfneblin that grants wishes if you close your right eye, make a peace sign with both hands, jump up and down, and twerk while chanting meccalekka high meccahighkneeho.

Does this mean that everyone who doesn't believe in svirfneblin now adheres to an ideology known as asvirfneblinism?

The behavior of believers and non believers will probably be different. I mean what non believer is likely to do the chant thingy for wishes?

Reductio ad absurdum


Perhaps if we lived in a world where the beliefs of billions of svirfneblin adherents affected the world. Perhaps if we lived in a world where svirfneblin was a dominant historical figure who had influenced philosophy, religion, politics and science for the last 5000 years. Perhaps then we would need a label for those that don't believe in svirfneblin. Until then, take your reductio arguments elsewhere.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Just out of interest's sake. Do any of you (Gadarene, Huntun, Ana the 1st, madaz, Chany or Cute Tink) disagree with the following statements:

I reject supernatural claims and believe in only natural phenomena as explanations
I believe in secular government
I do not highly value any religious texts
I am politically liberal or left-leaning
I am pro-choice
I value higher education
I value the scientific method
I believe that we make our own purpose
I believe morality is not objective but is either the product of evolution or is ultimately relativistic
I believe in evolution as a meta-narrative to how we came to be human
I do not believe in a soul



Because I mean, you guys are criticizing me for stereotyping and making generalization...but do any of you actually disagree with my assessment of atheism-as-an-ideology? I made a list of statements of belief; do any of you disagree with the statements?

We can talk semantics and definitions and reductio ad absurdums all day, but in the "real world", do most atheists agree?

 

[DiligentlySeekingGod]

Ana the Ist,

Thank you for your OP. I appreciate your openness.

 

[Ana the Ist]

For you and other reasonable and consistent atheists, the answer is no. But the moment you start advocating for your atheism, it then by definition becomes something positive. I distinguish between negative and positive atheism: the former where you don't believe in any deities, period; the latter where you don't believe in any deities and package this ideologically with other stuff, e.g., atheism as "rational", "scientific," "realistic," etc.

When you say "advocating for" do you mean making a claim like "atheism is better than christianity because..." or do you mean arguing for the position that atheism is true?