Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Phmcw]

So communism is a religion? There is something wrong with this definition (so is humanism, feminism, pro gun movement...).

[Farmerbob]

Photons were not detectable or comprehensible until a few decades ago, but I think a pretty good argument can be made that we needed them. There's nothing to say that we won't find out the same thing about a deity in a few years, or in a few thousand years.  Or maybe there is no deity, or maybe it will never allow us to know for sure if it exists.

I responded to your specific god claim.  Don't use more general gods as a counterargument.

Eh, I'm afraid you have lost me, I've never mentioned any specific god.  Unless you believe I think that photons are god?  I'll respond if you are clearer in your statement.

[Leafsnail]

4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

This definition is completely meaningless.

And it still doesn't apply to atheism.  Is "I don't think there's a god" a cause?  No.  Is it a principle?  No.  Is it a system of beliefs?  No.  Does it have to be held with "ardor and faith"?  No.

[Farmerbob]

So communism is a religion? There is something wrong with this definition (so is humanism, feminism, pro gun movement...).

Actually I would call communism a religion.  It's certainly never been proven to actually work like it says in the books.

Religion doesn't necessarily have to be directed at a deity, it's the act of believing in something despite there being no proof for it.

The people who wrote this definition were hedging their bets - notice that all four of the definitions could be fully contained in the fourth definition

[Leafsnail]

Although they weren't hedging their bets enough to make atheism included...

Remember, "I believe there's no god" = nontheist.

[Shades]

Definition of RELIGION
1a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

Clearly not.

2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

Hardly, and using religious in a definition of religion is strange.

3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

Nope.

4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Possibly a principle if wanting some kind of indication of things before blindly following them is a principle, hard to say. Otherwise no.

So using your own definition you prove atheism isn't a religion, thanks

Actually I would call communism a religion.  It's certainly never been proven to actually work like it says in the books.

This is actually true of democracy as well, and free-market capitalism for that matter. Not saying your wrong here just adding to the list of things you should consider a religion.

I think it's wrong to kill people on principle too, is that a religion?

[Farmerbob]

4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

This definition is completely meaningless.

And it still doesn't apply to atheism.  Is "I don't think there's a god" a cause?  No.  Is it a principle?  No.  Is it a system of beliefs?  No.  Does it have to be held with "ardor and faith"?  No.

1) Is "I don't think there's a god" a cause?  No.

Then why argue about it?

2) Is it a principle?  No.

Then why argue about it?

3) Is it a system of beliefs?  No.

Atheism most certainly is a system of beliefs.  A very simple one, but a system nonetheless.

4) Does it have to be held with "ardor and faith"?  No.

Most people, if they are not holding to Atheism with "ardor and faith" are actually agnostic.  There's a lot of confusion in the world today about the difference between Agnostics and Atheists.  An atheist believes, with no proof, that there is no possibility of the existence of a deity.  An agnostic believes, BECAUSE there is no proof, that it is uncertain if there's a deity or not.  There's a huge difference between these two, but a lot of people just don't see it.

[Siquo]

And it still doesn't apply to atheism.  Is "I don't think there's a god" a cause?  No.  Is it a principle?  No.  Is it a system of beliefs?  No.  Does it have to be held with "ardor and faith"?  No.

But "belief in scientific evidence" is a "system of beliefs". And that has been the only argument for not believing in God so far: that there was no evidence. And the ardor that some hard atheists display in respect to those scientific principles makes it a religion, for them.

If you don't believe in science, what do you believe in? Believing in nothing makes you either a nihilist (hey, that's a form of atheism, too, I think we haven't covered that one in the last 500 pages...) or agnostic.

Communism is actually a good example: The early communists wanted to abolish religion because it competed with communism

Edit: Ninja'd by bob who says almost exactly the same

[Darvi]

Most people, if they are not holding to Atheism with "ardor and faith" are actually agnostic.  There's a lot of confusion in the world today about the difference between Agnostics and Atheists.  An atheist believes, with no proof, that there is no possibility of the existence of a deity.  An agnostic believes, BECAUSE there is no proof, that it is uncertain if there's a deity or not.  There's a huge difference between these two, but a lot of people just don't see it.

Then what are people who simply don't care?

[Siquo]

Then what are people who simply don't care?

Careless.

[Darvi]

Then what are people who simply don't care?

Careless.

Good point.

[Farmerbob]

Most people, if they are not holding to Atheism with "ardor and faith" are actually agnostic.  There's a lot of confusion in the world today about the difference between Agnostics and Atheists.  An atheist believes, with no proof, that there is no possibility of the existence of a deity.  An agnostic believes, BECAUSE there is no proof, that it is uncertain if there's a deity or not.  There's a huge difference between these two, but a lot of people just don't see it.

Then what are people who simply don't care?

Irreligious

[Leafsnail]

1) Is "I don't think there's a god" a cause?  No.

Then why argue about it?

Non-sequiter.  I can think something's true without it being a cause.

If you told me that 2+2 was 5, I would tell you that it isn't, even thought 2+2=4 (or, indeed, mathematics as a whole) isn't a cause.

2) Is it a principle?  No.

Then why argue about it?

Non-sequiter.  See above.

3) Is it a system of beliefs?  No.

Atheism most certainly is a system of beliefs.  A very simple one, but a system nonetheless.

It's not a system.  It is one absence of a belief.  Even if you claim that atheism is a belief (using the logic that "everything is a belief", it's not a system of beliefs.  It's one element.  Your morals and general life outlook are not affected by it at all.

4) Does it have to be held with "ardor and faith"?  No.

Most people, if they are not holding to Atheism with "ardor and faith" are actually agnostic.  There's a lot of confusion in the world today about the difference between Agnostics and Atheists.  An atheist believes, with no proof, that there is no possibility of the existence of a deity.  An agnostic believes, BECAUSE there is no proof, that it is uncertain if there's a deity or not.  There's a huge difference between these two, but a lot of people just don't see it.

Wrong.

An atheist does NOT have to believe that there is no possibility of a god.  To be an atheist, you just have to not believe in one.

I don't think a God is impossible.  I think it's about as likely as invisible fairies in my garden or the FSM, but not impossible.  So I call myself an atheist.

Heck, even strong atheism (belief that there's no god) isn't really a religion.

[Darvi]

An atheist does NOT have to believe that there is no possibility of a god.  To be an atheist, you just have to not believe in one.

And that's where you're wrong.

[Leafsnail]

Well, if you're applying a ridiculously loose definition of a religion and a crazily tight definition of atheism... sure, I guess I'm not an atheist.  Wow!

On the other hand, that means that, say, Richard Dawkins isn't an atheist either.