Atheism, the discussion

[Redvers Ganderpoke]

Yes, but I find Christianity to be the least interesting.

You can see its roots in so many earlier religions. Maybe this is why so few people look into them in much depth. If you really do you would see there's nothing original.

Noah's flood? Gilgamesh Tablet 11, the world destruction myth from Mesopotamia. Almost word for word.
Too many other things to list, but they've got nothing original in Christianity.

Why pick on the christians? The story of Noah's ark is in both the Jewish and Islamic holy books as well. if fact most of what called the"old testament" is.

[fiksal]

Do people really believe in horoscopes though? Or are they just indulging in a bit of fun? I mean, the obvious "1/12th of the population have identical horoscope" should alone be enough to ... i mean, if they really believe it, then... I...

I think so. Yes.

This usually comes up in conversations with my Russian friends more than with American ones, but American ones are interested in them nonetheless. So at least based on that sampling, I'd say people are interested in them.

Not everyone takes them as 100% truth however, but since people think there's a non 0% of truth in them, then I have to say "yes" to your question.

[Chips]

Do people really believe in horoscopes though? Or are they just indulging in a bit of fun? I mean, the obvious "1/12th of the population have identical horoscope" should alone be enough to ... i mean, if they really believe it, then... I...

A proper horoscope (or at least, as proper as they get, those are one thing I'm happy to call cobblers) requires the exact time and place of your birth--there isn't any such as thing as "everyone fits into 12 groups". Those things in the newspapers are not real horoscopes.

Ah, so they are more tailored - but still just as much balderdash. The idea your entire life is irrelevant in your choices, actions, experiences, behaviours - but driven based upon nothing other than place and time of birth... does this mean everything in life is preset? I don't even know where to start talking to people about that one... seems incredible (if that's accurate). I should probably go read, but... reluctant to spend time on it

In religion (from what I understood from talking) they believe they're in charge of their own lives - they determine where and how they go, and their choices at any point will influence it... though influenced by their beliefs I guess. *slightly* more rational (... !) than horoscopes

[pjknibbs]

You're hitting upon the main reason I think horoscopes are cobblers there, which, for me, is because they remove any element of free will from your life. If someone can determine your life history from the time and place of your birth then free will is an illusion, and I quite like having it.

[Chips]

Have any atheists said they believe in ghosts/supernatural etc in here? As in... actually believe spirits roam the world. Big question around term spirit... given it's inherently linked to spiritual matters they otherwise claim not to believe in.

*edit* replaced misleading word.

[Ketraar]

I think free will is an illusion (on and off I must add, these things are never quite set, though mainly I have no idea, today I'm inclined due to this), but still am pretty sure horoscopes are nonsense. Much like with religion, I think its a human coping mechanism to invoke hope and "purpose" if you will, which is why many of the predictions are positive leaning, anyone one I know that does read them, will dismiss any version that foretells any less positive "future". Also any insight into a future would negate its outcome no?

Anyway, as a non religious/superstitious person (you could say Atheist, but its not really accurate, as it implies somewhat that I care about the (non)existence of any deity, which I dont), I have high tolerance for those that are, I'm in a society that has great ties to religion and our culture is swamped by it, both positive and negative (sadly more negative I must say). I can easily cope with people that are religious, even if they themselves often dont even know what being religious even means, its not like many spend much time thinking, nvm reading about it.

I do have issues though when religious people cant separate their freedom to be religious and the rest of society. Once its start getting in schools, politics, and worse taking up space from science and education, then the tolerance if off. I feel if your faith is true and strong you dont need to force it down other people's throats, especially children and try to indoctrinate them. If the message is appealing enough, there wont be any need to trick, lie or scare people into joining.

MFG

Ketraar

PS.:

Have any atheists said they believe in ghosts/paranormal etc in here? As in... actualyl believe spirits roam the world. Big question around term spirit... given it's inherently linked to spiritual matters they otherwise claim not to believe in.

Not in ghosts in the sense that usually is understood, of souls of dead people. Not sure what paranormal is meant to as, since that can mean many things. Its like most people misuse the word UFO, while meaning ET-Vessel/object, whil it only describes not knowing...
So my answer is no.

[Chips]

Sorry, for me paranormal is something we cannot explain with science or other - and is deemed "supernatural" (rather than just no scientific explanation as of yet, but possible based on observations and empirical measurements - just unable to link it mathematically so far. But I stress I'm no mathematician, and not a real scientist of any rigour!)

[Ketraar]

Yes but my point was that "paranormal" is pretty much everything I (we) dont understand (yet), hence the difficulty in asserting any "belief" in it, since its the default state we are born into.

MFG

Ketraar

[fiksal]

Have any atheists said they believe in ghosts/paranormal etc in here? As in... actualyl believe spirits roam the world. Big question around term spirit... given it's inherently linked to spiritual matters they otherwise claim not to believe in.

Not that I've seen yet.

I don't, though I've used to, when I was much younger. Also I wasn't an atheist then, even when I thought I was.

I do have issues though when religious people cant separate their freedom to be religious and the rest of society. Once its start getting in schools, politics, and worse taking up space from science and education, then the tolerance if off. I feel if your faith is true and strong you dont need to force it down other people's throats, especially children and try to indoctrinate them. If the message is appealing enough, there wont be any need to trick, lie or scare people into joining.

Yes that is usually when there are problems.

But, to play just a little devil's advocate. I dont think (most?) religious see it as indoctrination. To them - this is the one true path - and why wouldnt you want to have children follow it rather than pay the (severe) consequence.

I am not excusing, just clarifying.

Yes but my point was that "paranormal" is pretty much everything I (we) dont understand (yet), hence the difficulty in asserting any "belief" in it, since its the default state we are born into.

Well, interestingly enough Webster defines it as "not scientifically explainable".
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paranormal

So out of the gate, it is flat out can not be explained, ever.

[Mightysword]

any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic

While this particular quote is often used to dismiss phenomenon viewed as miracle or magic, I think people should also take it the other way around. It also means that magic can simply be something that our current level of science hasn't been able to explain yet, but that does not mean they don't "exist", and to dismiss them so is unwise.

The human eyes can't see certain things, we know cats do not view the world the same way we do, migratory birds can feel the planet the way human can't. Our science had got to a point where we had developed device to give us a different view, to help our eyes see what it can not be seen, to help us navigate the way birds can. So, in my opinion, things like people seeing Spirit or Ghost could very well be true, but right now our science level is not at a level that can explain those strange phenomenal yet. When people see thing, it can be the case that certain conditions are met and triggered the ability to see what can not normally be seen (in case of my clan some of this can be activate at will with sufficient training). Right now "science" tend to dismiss these as hallucination, and yes, most of them probably are, but actual cases certain exist.

Here is a line that came from (ironically) a magical show that I watch. When a magician got hit by something that should have killed him but didn't, one of the magician remark:

- How, that's impossible with magic.

To which another magician replied:

- Calm down, I had heard he was trained in ancient martial art that's know to strengthen the body. Magic is not the only miracle in the world, and the knowledge we have is not all there exist.

Fanatically believe in supernatural is fool-harshly, dismissing science is ignorant, but on the same token having an absolute belief that nothing can possible exist outside of science can also be view as "arrogant". After all, that would mean you believe our science had reached the apex level, and there is nothing else to discover. Do you believe our science level is anywhere THAT point currently? There is a sup-phase I like to add after the word science - "as we know it". For example:

According to modern science and physic model - as we know it, there exists something call "anti-matter" to help explain the imbalance mass of the universe. While I know anti-matter is not simply a handwaving theory, and it does base on some solid reasoning, it doesn't change the fact it's merely a placeholder to explain "phenomena" base on a framework "limited by our current knowledge".

A quick reminder that as advance as modern science is, we still don't have a full understanding even of our body, it is therefore reasonable to surmise that there are some unknow potential to use that can be triggered if the conditions is right.

[Alan Phipps]

Given the likelihood of further evolution of the human race (or any replacement?), there will probably come a next distinct stage of biological or intelligence development ahead. (No, I'm not opening the Bible vs Darwin debate here.) Since we do not currently understand what that stage will be and what capabilities it might give, it may indeed give abilities that might seem 'supernatural' today. Individual members within the common mass may be evolving at slightly different rates. <shrugs>

[Ketraar]

Since we do not currently understand what that stage will be and what capabilities it might give, it may indeed give abilities that might seem 'supernatural' today.

Yes, but again, isnt that default for all things? The main shortcomings for early definitions of what is "natural" (which if we are clear, everything is since its within the existing natural laws) was the need to define things without understanding. This is a thing that seems to be encoded in human nature. People have a incline to come to conclusions based on "intuition" or guesses. having this need to define and label everything, is what holds us back, since, not knowing, is the first step in the pursuit to understanding and people truly have a hard time saying/admitting they dont know, for some reason. Instead we should keep track of things we dont understand and and be inspired to learn (more) about them, without fear of finding out things are not as we thought or wanted them to be, it'll be fine.

MFG

Ketraar

[mrbadger]

Yes, but I find Christianity to be the least interesting.

You can see its roots in so many earlier religions. Maybe this is why so few people look into them in much depth. If you really do you would see there's nothing original.

Noah's flood? Gilgamesh Tablet 11, the world destruction myth from Mesopotamia. Almost word for word.
Too many other things to list, but they've got nothing original in Christianity.

Why pick on the christians? The story of Noah's ark is in both the Jewish and Islamic holy books as well. if fact most of what called the"old testament" is.

You missed my point. It's not who I picked that matters, it's that the story predates all Abrahamic religions. It's ancient, they all took it.

[Chips]

Yes but my point was that "paranormal" is pretty much everything I (we) dont understand (yet), hence the difficulty in asserting any "belief" in it, since its the default state we are born into.

MFG

Ketraar

Ah, in that case my idea of paranormal was wrong and I meant supernatural. Paranormal is the description until something is investigated and the cause found a la X Files then

[pjknibbs]

You missed my point. It's not who I picked that matters, it's that the story predates all Abrahamic religions. It's ancient, they all took it.

I quite like the idea that all these worldwide flood myths we see are distorted memories of the time at the end of the last Ice Age where sea levels rose sharply. There was an entire landmass in the middle of the North Sea that got drowned back then, and ten thousand years ago is well within the existence of modern man.

[Observe]

Here's the thing. Humans are story tellers. Our whole civilization and our diverse cultures are all designed around stories. Our education systems work at teaching people how to live on-script. Religion, economics, national identity and much of our behavior and thought, are derived from stories we tell each other and that we "believe".

This is what distinguishes us from other animals. It is what give us our collective power. This characteristic of story-telling and story believing is both our boon, and also may be the cause of our demise. Many of our stories are designed to keep us comfortably numb, in the face of an indifferent universe.

[Bishop149]

So I filled in a survey today which asked me about any faith I might hold.
I was amused and a little surprised to see that "Atheist" and "No religion" were separate boxes.

So, question. . . Is Atheism a religion?
I had a look at a few definitions and I think I'd lean towards "yes".

Here is what Google will define it as
1) The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
2) A particular system of faith and worship.
3) A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.

1) and 2) certainly don't apply to Atheism but I've absolutely seen 3) apply in specific individual cases.
But these dictionary definitions are a little simplistic, here are a couple of more philosophical ones:

- "A unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say things set apart and forbidden - beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a church, all those who adhere to them"
- "A comprehensive worldview or 'metaphysical moral vision' that is accepted as binding because it is held to be in itself basically true and just even if all dimensions of it cannot be either fully confirmed or refuted"
- "A cultural system of designated behaviours and practices, morals, worldviews, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organisations, that relates humanity to supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual elements"

I think that much of that could apply to Atheism. . . . even if your position is: "nothing is sacred" or "there are no supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual elements" you've still taken a position "relative" to those things that "relates" to them. . . . Atheists could also definitely be defined as a "single moral community".

[RegisterMe]

Preacher in the DRC goes to some rural villages to do a bit of the old "laying on of hands healing". Preacher catches ebola. Preacher returns to Goma, with a population of 1 million.

Good job religion, good job superstition, good job not believing in a science based approach.

[mrbadger]

So I filled in a survey today which asked me about any faith I might hold.
I was amused and a little surprised to see that "Atheist" and "No religion" were separate boxes.

So, question. . . Is Atheism a religion?
I had a look at a few definitions and I think I'd lean towards "yes".

Here is what Google will define it as
1) The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
2) A particular system of faith and worship.
3) A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.

1) and 2) certainly don't apply to Atheism but I've absolutely seen 3) apply in specific individual cases.
But these dictionary definitions are a little simplistic, here are a couple of more philosophical ones:

- "A unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say things set apart and forbidden - beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a church, all those who adhere to them"
- "A comprehensive worldview or 'metaphysical moral vision' that is accepted as binding because it is held to be in itself basically true and just even if all dimensions of it cannot be either fully confirmed or refuted"
- "A cultural system of designated behaviours and practices, morals, worldviews, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organisations, that relates humanity to supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual elements"

I think that much of that could apply to Atheism. . . . even if your position is: "nothing is sacred" or "there are no supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual elements" you've still taken a position "relative" to those things that "relates" to them. . . . Atheists could also definitely be defined as a "single moral community".

Atheism isn't a religion as the term is applied in most cases, as in where there is a belief in some supreme being (for example, the Abrahamics, Zoroastrianism (Ahura Mazda).

But then not all religions think there is one, some just think there's a perfect state of being to achieve, or something like that. It's far too complex to discuss here.

Atheism has a spectrum. There are people who just don't believe in god, so call themselves atheists and leave it at that. This is of course entirely valid.

Then there are people who embrace the concept, and won't just take the 'there is no god' argument at face value.

Why is there no god?

Where did this idea of god come from?

How can more be learned?

How do the worlds religions, ancient and modern compare?

It's a rabbit hole with no escape, and it's fascinating.

Honestly, when you get into this level of thought, and quite a few atheists do, is it really not a religion of sorts? I wouldn't be willing to give up my studies of the history of ancient religion, not easily.

After all, Jedi is trying hard to be considered a real religion, and I honestly can't see any reason that shouldn't be valid.

[Ketraar]

I think the bare minimum for anything to be called a "religion" it has to have some sort of dogma, just a belief in something does not apply imho. There are people that do believe in (a) god(s) and/or other supernatural entities without being part of any religion. I'm not aware of a movement of atheism that involves a dogma and as such I would think it does not quilify as a religion. If atheism could be considered a religion, would being vegan not also qualify as religion considering that has more of a dogma attached to it?

MFG

Ketraar