Is Atheism a religion? - Armor Games Community

245	38628

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted September 3, '10 6:11am UTC

the doctrine or belief that there is no god.

This is a misleading definition as it's not a doctrine and not a belief.

Misrepresenting Atheism

And MageGrayWolf, instead of telling me something that is counter productive, why don't you tell me something that IS productive

All you did was repeat your previous argument and inserted "like it or not it's true". However we have already pointed out the fallacy of this here, so what do you want me to do, keep repeating "it's a lack of belief in god, not a belief" until it sinks into your head?

you do have a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,

Actually it's more of an accepted theory then a belief, and it isn't connected to the atheism.

you beleive there is no meaning

I believe there is meaning. But again nothing to do with atheism.

if you said that earlier, you could have saved us from 6 pages.

he more or less did.

Nope atheism, by definition, is the absence of a belief in any form of deity.

[quote]the doctrine or belief that there is no god.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThis is a misleading definition as it's not a doctrine and not a belief.\r\n\r\n[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt1wDNRkllQ]Misrepresenting Atheism[/url]\r\n\r\n[quote]And MageGrayWolf, instead of telling me something that is counter productive, why don't you tell me something that IS productive [/quote]\r\n\r\nAll you did was repeat your previous argument and inserted "like it or not it's true". However we have already pointed out the fallacy of this here, so what do you want me to do, keep repeating "it's a lack of belief in god, not a belief" until it sinks into your head?\r\n\r\n[quote]you do have a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,[/quote]\r\n\r\nActually it's more of an accepted theory then a belief, and it isn't connected to the atheism.\r\n\r\n[quote]you beleive there is no meaning[/quote]\r\n\r\nI believe there is meaning. But again nothing to do with atheism.\r\n\r\n[quote]if you said that earlier, you could have saved us from 6 pages.[/quote]\r\n\r\nhe more or less did. \r\n\r\n[quote]Nope atheism, by definition, is the absence of a belief in any form of deity.[/quote]

offline

nevetsthereaper

641 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 6:17am UTC

it doesn't say not a religion, it says they don't believe in any current or past religion, lets break down the definition as avorne quoted it shall we?:

a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

A.

a set of beliefs concerning the cause nature and purpose of the universe

= doesnt say that you have to have a theory, but asserting that you believe god didn't do it is a belief concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, so yes

B.

esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies

(esp. = especially)= especially, but not required to be a religion.

C.

usually involving devotional and ritual observances

= no rituals that i know of, (besides those crazies burning bibles) but devotion, i would have to say that many athiests are devoted to being athiests.

and

D.

and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs

= not that i know of, but again, religions often have this, not required to be a religion.

so all in all, athiest do fit under avornes definition of a religion.

it doesn't say not a religion, it says they don't believe in any current or past religion, lets break down the definition as avorne quoted it shall we?:\r\n\r\n[quote]a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. [/quote]\r\n\r\nA. [quote]a set of beliefs concerning the cause nature and purpose of the universe[/quote] = doesnt say that you have to have a theory, but asserting that you believe god didn't do it is a belief concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, so yes\r\n\r\nB. [quote]esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies[/quote](esp. = especially)= especially, but not required to be a religion.\r\n\r\nC. [quote]usually involving devotional and ritual observances [/quote]= no rituals that i know of, (besides those crazies burning bibles) but devotion, i would have to say that many athiests are devoted to being athiests.\r\n\r\nand \r\n\r\nD. [quote]and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs [/quote]= not that i know of, but again, religions often have this, not required to be a religion.\r\n\r\n\r\nso all in all, athiest do fit under avornes definition of a religion.

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted September 3, '10 6:37am UTC

doesnt say that you have to have a theory, but asserting that you believe god didn't do it is a belief concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, so yes

Just because the belief or theory of how it happened doesn't include god doesn't make atheism the belief.

i would have to say that many athiests are devoted to being athiests.

Most if provide with sufficient evidence of a deity would no longer be atheists, so no it's in most cases not something that holds devotion.

offline

Moegreche

3,826 posts

Duke

Posted September 3, '10 6:38am UTC

Atheists BELIEVE there is no God. Whether you like it or not, it is true. However, does this make it a religion? A religion IS based on beliefs, no?

This is not the same argument you presented in the OP, which I refuted several pages ago. Allow me to refute this one, as well:

1) Atheists believe there is no God.
2) All religions are based on beliefs.
3) Therefore, atheism is a religion.

As is stands, this argument is simply a non sequitur. The conclusion simply does not follow from the premises.
A sillier version of a non sequitur is something like: I like apples, therefore trees are green.
Even those both those statements are true, the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.

I imagine you're thinking we need an additional premise, something like: "Any system of beliefs is a religion." which is close to what you'd need to get the conclusion to follow. But clearly, this premise is false. You would also have to motive the claim that atheism is a system of beliefs, which is also false.

= doesnt say that you have to have a theory, but asserting that you believe god didn't do it is a belief concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, so yes

Religions have positive beliefs. They assert certain things. For example, Christianity asserts that Jesus was the son of God.
Atheism, we could say, is a negative belief. We simply deny the proposition asserted by the theist. Now, there is a debate to be had as to whether denying a proposition is epistemically equivalent to asserting that same proposition's denial (I happen to think it's not), but the dichotomy between a theist's belief and an atheist's denial of a proposition should be clear.

The rest of your points were rather fruitless, so I though I'd just let them be.

[quote]Atheists BELIEVE there is no God. Whether you like it or not, it is true. However, does this make it a religion? A religion IS based on beliefs, no?[/quote] \r\n\r\nThis is not the same argument you presented in the OP, which I refuted several pages ago. Allow me to refute this one, as well:\r\n\r\n1) Atheists believe there is no God.\r\n2) All religions are based on beliefs.\r\n3) Therefore, atheism is a religion.\r\n\r\nAs is stands, this argument is simply a non sequitur. The conclusion simply does not follow from the premises.\r\nA sillier version of a non sequitur is something like: I like apples, therefore trees are green.\r\nEven those both those statements are true, the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.\r\n\r\nI imagine you're thinking we need an additional premise, something like: "Any system of beliefs is a religion." which is close to what you'd need to get the conclusion to follow. But clearly, this premise is false. You would also have to motive the claim that atheism is a system of beliefs, which is also false.\r\n\r\n[quote]= doesnt say that you have to have a theory, but asserting that you believe god didn't do it is a belief concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, so yes[/quote] \r\n\r\nReligions have positive beliefs. They assert certain things. For example, Christianity asserts that Jesus was the son of God.\r\nAtheism, we could say, is a negative belief. We simply deny the proposition asserted by the theist. Now, there is a debate to be had as to whether denying a proposition is epistemically equivalent to asserting that same proposition's denial (I happen to think it's not), but the dichotomy between a theist's belief and an atheist's denial of a proposition should be clear.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe rest of your points were rather fruitless, so I though I'd just let them be.

offline

NoNameC68

5,043 posts

Shepherd

Posted September 3, '10 6:44am UTC

1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Atheism is the lack of belief in God, so this definition does not match.

2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

Specific fundamental set of beliefs, that isn't atheism. Atheism is merely the lack of belief in God, so this definition also does not work.

3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

Pretty much the same as 2.

4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

Nope.

5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

The lack of belief in God is not religious, so this also does not work.

6.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

This one is difficult to explain.

This definition of religion is specific unto itself. Whereas Christianity can be a religion under most of the other definitions, it can't be a religion under this definition. This definition of religion is purely used to describe devotion to a belief, which is different than actually being a belief. Because of this, Atheism is not a religion, but one can become an atheist and act religiously about it (as much as someone can act religiously to legalize marijuana).

In short, this isn't atheism.

7.
religions, Archaic . religious rites.
8.
Archaic . strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.

And this does not describe atheism.

After going over this, I have concluded that atheism is not a religion. Here's the kicker. Theism isn't even a religion!

Theism simply describs the belief in a higher being. Theism does not have a set of beliefs, it IS a belief. Christianity, on the other hand, is not a belief, it is a set of beliefs.

[quote]1.\r\na set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. [/quote]\r\n\r\nAtheism is the lack of belief in God, so this definition does not match.\r\n\r\n[quote]2.\r\na specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects[/quote]\r\n\r\nSpecific fundamental set of beliefs, that isn't atheism. Atheism is merely the lack of belief in God, so this definition also does not work.\r\n\r\n[quote]3.\r\nthe body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions. [/quote]\r\n\r\nPretty much the same as 2.\r\n\r\n[quote]4.\r\nthe life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion. [/quote]\r\n\r\nNope.\r\n\r\n[quote]5.\r\nthe practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith. [/quote]\r\n\r\nThe lack of belief in God is not religious, so this also does not work.\r\n\r\n[quote]6.\r\nsomething one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice. [/quote]\r\n\r\nThis one is difficult to explain.\r\n\r\nThis definition of religion is specific unto itself. Whereas Christianity can be a religion under most of the other definitions, it can't be a religion under this definition. This definition of religion is purely used to describe [i]devotion to a belief[/i], which is different than actually [b]being[/b] a belief. Because of this, Atheism is not a religion, but one can become an atheist and act religiously about it (as much as someone can act religiously to legalize marijuana).\r\n\r\nIn short, this isn't atheism.\r\n\r\n[quote]7.\r\nreligions, Archaic . religious rites.\r\n8.\r\nArchaic . strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow. [/quote]\r\n\r\nAnd this does not describe atheism.\r\n\r\nAfter going over this, I have concluded that atheism is not a religion. [b]Here's the kicker. Theism isn't even a religion![/b]\r\n\r\nTheism simply describs the belief in a higher being. Theism does not have a set of beliefs, it [i]IS a belief[/i]. Christianity, on the other hand, is not a belief, it [i]is a set of beliefs[/i].

offline

nevetsthereaper

641 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 8:31am UTC

hmmmmmm, what do you say when you agree to disagree. on this, i cant help but feel like your in denial. it was stated a page or two back, that for some reason, religion is referred to in a negative way, i know alot of religions have done crazy things in the past, and still hold some nutty beliefs, but they really are nice people, many of them are just normal people, that needed an answer to the bad things that had happened. now i can logically deduce the causes and effects of things like economic instability, and our resources running low, but others simply cannot grasp at it.

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted September 3, '10 11:51am UTC

on this, i cant help but feel like your in denial.

How so?
Atheism doesn't hold doctrines concerning the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. Most atheists are devoted, they will expect they are wrong if presented with sufficient evidence. It doesn't even fit the criteria of being a belief. These were the points put forth claiming it to be a religion and it doesn't meet these criteria.

And NoName is correct not even theism is a religon.

offline

locoace3

15,053 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 5:12pm UTC

don't say that evelution is proven because if it was these debates would be alot shorter.

no fair crazier Christan people get to wave around the bible saying god did it why can't crazier evolutionists wave around Darwin book on evolution yelling evolution did it?

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted September 3, '10 5:24pm UTC

don't say that evelution is proven because if it was these debates would be alot shorter.

Actually it is proven, but that doesn't have anything to do with this debate.

offline

locoace3

15,053 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 5:32pm UTC

yah i'd like to see the fossil of an angel or Jesus and I'll give up with the evolution

offline

HahiHa

8,256 posts

Regent

Posted September 3, '10 5:35pm UTC

yah i'd like to see the fossil of an angel or Jesus and I'll give up with the evolution

Why? Angels could as well be a product of evolution XD

offline

holt24

1,133 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 5:37pm UTC

You guys are honestly saying evelution is proven.I think you guys forget that it is a theory.If it was proven then why is it called the theory of evelution.We can only try our best to explain why we think our beleifs are true and try to make sense of it but saying fossils prove eveluion to be true is a lie since it can just as easily prove creationism to be true.

offline

locoace3

15,053 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 5:40pm UTC

You guys are honestly saying evelution is proven.I think you guys forget that it is a theory.If it was proven then why is it called the theory of evelution.We can only try our best to explain why we think our beleifs are true and try to make sense of it but saying fossils prove eveluion to be true is a lie since it can just as easily prove creationism to be true.

well first try and spell evolution its more provable than a bearded dude in the clouds really

second if evolution isn't true why won't god just come down and say it really...

third i never seen gods seal of approval on any fossil so...yeah...

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted September 3, '10 5:45pm UTC

I think you guys forget that it is a theory.If it was proven then why is it called the theory of evelution.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory like gravity. Also a scientific theory is the highest thing you can have as that is an explanation to all the facts presented.

true and try to make sense of it but saying fossils prove eveluion to be true is a lie since it can just as easily prove creationism to be true.

Umm no, but if you want to continue this debate I would recommend moving it to it's own topic.

offline

holt24

1,133 posts

Nomad

Posted September 3, '10 5:46pm UTC

So I guess your're saying evolution has a seal of approval on fossils?For you're second question God gives people free will to believe in him if he came and showed all atheists and other religions wrong you would bassicly have to beleive in him.Oh and sorry for spelling bad.

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → Is Atheism a religion?