jdlongmire

1. Does atheism promote any sort of governance model for society?

2. What is the basis for law in this model?

3. How could this model be practically implemented?

4. Would the governance model allow for war?

5. Defense and offense or just defense?

6. Would the model also require that no human, or group of humans perish for the greater good of humanity/society?

Links accepted...

Writer@Large

No. Atheism simply means the person in question has rejected all theistic concepts. It does not offer the atheist a guide to life, or good behavior, or political motive; it simply labels the atheist as a nonbeliever in your god, or his god, or any god.

Thus, the rest of your questions are somewhat moot. You might want to investigate secular humanism, though, which is one of the leading philosophies amongst atheist-minded folks. It does provide for moral/ethical frameworks, and thus influences political attitudes.

--W@L

Norseman

No.

Error Number 2

Error Number 2

Error Number 2

Error Number 2

Error Number 2




Beliefs may bring about a law of "divine" origin, lack of belief does nothing of the sort. The only thing atheism says about a person is that they don't believe in god(s), that's it and there's nothing else to it.

As an atheist, as a human more importantly, it is still possible to establish laws for a society, even wolves develop cultural tendencies, though nothing as complex as laws.

Now, in my opinion, there should never be an excuse for war, even in one's own defense. There are methods besides war to end a war, such as diplomacy. If it comes down to it, and war is the only way to protect innocent people, at the very least no one should be killed. If it comes down to it again, and lethal response is the only one, then always choose the lesser evil. Which is worse, to let an innocent man die, or to kill a murderer?

Eudaimonist

No.

However, there are atheistic ideologies that contain political philosophies. For example, Marxism and Communism, and Ayn Rand's philosophy and Capitalism.

jdlongmire

hmmm, this mode of inquiry seems to have died before it started, perhaps next time I will couch it in more subjective terms...

1. As an atheist do you ascribe to any sort of governance model for society?

2. What is the basis for law in this model?

3. etc.

...maybe?

Writer@Large

Sure. But then, you'll likely get as many answers as you do atheists . Which might make the inquiry equally fruitless for you.

What are you looking to find out with these questions? Maybe we can start there.

--W@L

Hobbs

Depending on what you mean here, it looks like you are still making the same mistake. As an atheist, I do not believe that there is a theistic god. But other than the obvious conclusion that I therefore do not think that there is a governance model for society given to us by a god, nothing else is necessarily entailed by being an atheist. I could be a socialist, as are some theists. I could be a libertarian, as are some theists. I could be a monarchist, as are some theists.

Would you mind explaining a bit more what you are looking for and what is behind the questions? For example, why does this topic fit in "general religious discussions" rather than "political discussions"? Do you perhaps think that we need a God to have a basis for a governance model, and are you asking how anyone can have such a basis without God being behind it?

Hobbs

By the way, to be a bit more specific if it's any help, I do have sympathy with the claim that supreme executive power is derived by a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Triple Six

As has already been explained atheism has nothing to with any specific political stand so the OP is asking pointless and irrelevant questions.

What I do know is that basing a politcal system on a book that is factually inaccurate at best, absolute fantasy a lot of the time and contains the 2000 years old and more prejudices of uninformed middle eastern tribes is not the basis of fair modern and equitable policies.

Eudaimonist

You could describe me roughly as a libertarian capitalist, or as a "liberal" in the European sense.

2. What is the basis for law in this model?

The purpose of government is to secure the conditions required for each and all to flourish through their own efforts and in trade or other peaceful interaction with others. These conditions are secured through the enforcement of principles called "individual rights" (including private property rights), which form the basis for specific laws.

3. How could this model be practically implemented?

A constitutional republic with democratically elected representatives. Nothing too surprising here.

4. Would the governance model allow for war?

Yes.

5. Defense and offense or just defense?

I personally prefer just defense, but some have argued that offense can be justified.

6. Would the model also require that no human, or group of humans perish for the greater good of humanity/society?

There would be no draft, so no one would be compelled by force to die for any "greater good".

BTW, I don't believe in a "greater good". There is only the good of specific individuals. People perishing for some "greater good" are simply perishing for someone's or some group's personal good(s).