Amos

Do I smell some cinders still glowing from the time you were a Christian? Nah, piss on it. Leave'r alone, or should I?

[ September 07, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

diana

Why start now, my sweet?

I do have many cinders still glowing from years of Xn brainwashing, I admit, but this isn't one of them. This is simply disgust with people who don't think about the words they use. "A-theism" has a very obvious and clear meaning, and it has nothing to do with "denial" of anything.

It's more an English pedant disgust than a latent Xn one.

Good to see you back around, my old nemesis. Happy arguing!

d

Laurentius

Cultural anthropologists often regard humans as religious beings since religions or religion-like doctrine seem to be embeded in everyone's mentality. You can call atheism a "religion" if you want, but once you've done so you'll have missed the point. Religions are by definition dogmatic doctrines whose principles and practices have to be assimilated unquestioned and unaltered. Atheism is against dogmatism, the only principle dear to it being the idea that there's no god.

AVE

joedad

diana,

Lets get theism described in atheistic terms, instead of allowing some theists to define atheism as just another religion. I personally like to say that if atheism is a religion, then "no football" is a sport.

Couldn't we call theism, and more generally religion, the disbelief or lack of belief in the fact that gods are imaginary? After all, only a soteriological cultural prejudice, in the U.S. anyway, has preset the default setting to belief, and thereby conferred a negative spin on anything else.

Perhaps atheists ought to start calling theists (not pantheists) arationalists. That might even work at the beginning of any conversation with such folk; "Are you a rationalist or an arationalist...? An arationalist would be in denial of rational thought as far as the god concept is concerned, yes?

Of course, I wouldn't get pushy of "fundyish" about the idea, but it might make the point with someone too dense or presently too indoctrinated to understand otherwise.

joe

[ September 07, 2002: Message edited by: joedad ]</p>

diana

This has something to do with the fact that humans are the only creature that buries their dead, a practice associated with a belief in the supernatural, doesn't it?

Religions are by definition dogmatic doctrines whose principles and practices have to be assimilated unquestioned and unaltered.

To be fair, I've seen many theists argue that most atheists seem to be arguing everything from the same primer. And they have a point.

So (devil's advocate mode on)...do you think it's possible that atheists dogmatically assimilate their ideas as unquestioned and unaltered as the Xns do theirs? I think many do, and this is precisely what Xns mean when they accuse us of "having a religion."

Atheism is against dogmatism, the only principle dear to it being the idea that there's no god.

Yes. In theory it's against dogmatism. In reality, though, I think we can be quite dogmatic.

Perchance the reality of how we see ourselves versus how we actually behave is as diverse as how Xns see themselves and how they actually behave.

Maybe?

d

diana

Nice. Quotable. Thanks.

IOWs, theism is "the denial that there is no god," yes?

After all, only a soteriological cultural prejudice, in the U.S. anyway, has preset the default setting to belief, and thereby conferred a negative spin on anything else.

Kinda like "fiction" and "non-fiction," isn't it? Who'd ever think to label writing that purports to be true as "not untrue"?

Perhaps atheists ought to start calling theists (not pantheists) arationalists. That might even work at the beginning of any conversation with such folk; "Are you a rationalist or an arationalist...? An arationalist would be in denial of rational thought as far as the god concept is concerned, yes?

Nice. This might get them to think about what the "a-" prefix really means, as well.

d

Starboy

Yes diana, I say Fuck 'em also, and I was never an xian. After 45 years of in your face christianity I have become very militant. I used to think live and let live, but xians don't know how to do that, so Fuck 'em.

Starboy

Perchance

I like the term "infidel" (and have been using it more and more often, along with non-believer). I think the one unfortunate aspect of it is that it seems so close- for some people- to infidelity, and therefore might contribute to the impression that not only are non-theists not faithful to God, they aren't faithful to other people.

However, this usage of "faith" doesn't seem to be as widespread as it once was, so perhaps I am worrying about nothing.

I do know that when someone asked me what religion I was as an undergrad, and I replied, "I'm agnostic," a certain panicked look would come over their faces. Most of the time, they didn't know what it meant, and were afraid to look stupid by asking. They would say, "That's nice," and walk away.

Those who did ask, and listened to my explanation, couldn't seem to assimilate it. One person, after talking with me for fifteen minutes, said, "Oh, I get it. You don't believe in God God. Cool! Are you Hindu or something?"



I think part of the reason some theists insist on calling atheism a religion is because they literally have no conception of anything outside religion's walls. Atheism has to be a religion, to this kind of person, not because it fits the definition so well, but because there doesn't exist an opposite to or lack of religion, and therefore there can't possibly exist a person without it.

There's also a conception I've heard a few times (limited to fundy Christians, I think) that atheists worship Satan, even if they don't know they're doing so. That would make it a religion. But I don't know much that can be done about that, unless the Christian is willing to stop believing in the existence of Satan.

-Perchance.

joedad

Don't even know what my one son has on his, if anything, but I'm certain it's not "christian." It may well not have been, except for the local fundy cult and the arrogant preacher he learned to hate. Sad actually, a real piece of work this arse.

joe

diana

Hi, Perchance! Thanks for visiting my thread. I'm honored.

I think part of the reason some theists insist on calling atheism a religion is because they literally have no conception of anything outside religion's walls. Atheism has to be a religion, to this kind of person, not because it fits the definition so well, but because there doesn't exist an opposite to or lack of religion, and therefore there can't possibly exist a person without it.

Sometimes, yes. And when this is the case, I'm looking for some new angle that'll get through to them. I refuse to accept that there simply is no way to communicate and broaden their minds.

You can say "Don't drink and drive" forever, and people are likely to ignore you. They've heard this so much that it's a platitude. But when you say, "The next time you're thinking about drinking and driving, stop for a moment to consider how your mother is going to react when she answers doorbell at 2am to find a police officer, hat in hand, with that look on his face. Stop to think what's going to go through her mind in the long moment when their eyes meet, then imagine how she'll feel when he tells her that her boy is dead."

Or, in a movie about accomplishing the impossible, A Time to Kill, after the defense has explained in graphic detail to an all-white southern jury what happened to the innocent black girl at the hands of drunken bigoted assholes, he said, "Now...imagine she's white."

There has to be a way. It's just a matter of finding it.

There's also a conception I've heard a few times (limited to fundy Christians, I think) that atheists worship Satan, even if they don't know they're doing so. That would make it a religion. But I don't know much that can be done about that, unless the Christian is willing to stop believing in the existence of Satan.

Not likely. So...accidentally and unwittingly worshipping Satan is a religion? Hm.

d