Why Atheism Is A Religion

I don't think that atheists are more than a movement. It's a movement against idea's that can't be proven and are highly unlikely.

I think an atheist is more likely to achieve some sort of Godly consciousness, in the sense of being a God when they die. This is not uncommon among those that do take psychedelics. You can achieve something heavenly or powerful that skates that rim of being a God. It's ok!

It's harder to believe that there is a single source of consciousness that exists that is in control of all things. I doubt one single item created all of creation, all that was or will ever be. But we don't really know where existence comes from or where it's going.

There must be conflict or there wouldn't be debate that leads to growth of understanding.

 

An atheist being more likely to become a god when they die is pretty absurd.

To me, conflict is something that has to be taken personally in order to exist. But that's kind of a circular argument, that conflict exists because you take things personally. If you're just an object, you can't really be said to be at odds with anything. A comet isn't "at odds" with a planet when it smashes into it, for instance. So either we are objects, in which case conflict doesn't really exist, or we are something more than objects.

 

How the hell would you know anything about that? See, this is called, "pretending to know what you do not know"

 

So to invert what you said earlier: are believers secretly terrified that God isn't real??

 

Anecdotal evidence from people who have had near-death experiences. Now what are you going to tell me, that they're all making up stories about what they claim to have experienced?

I know I'll have to make the obvious point here that I'm not saying their experiences are real, but that, at death, people have believed things that someone like you would say are irrational. They believe they've gone to Heaven, gone to outer space, gone beyond time and space, met alien creatures, become creatures (such as butterflies and worms), etc.

What are you telling me, that they're not literally at death or they'd be dead, and therefore what happens to them is nothing like what happens to people when they actually die?

Fine, then I just find it funny that numerous atheists have had near-death experiences and believed total bullshit about themselves.

 

Possibly, I wouldn't know. Probably more pre-occupied with weather they are going to hell or not to think about anything like that.

 

Drink Coke.

 

We already know in Science that organisms' DNA among many different species are identical until they get to a certain point of development. What is outlandish of thinking that everything stems from one singular ultimate source? Isn't the Big Bang even supposing this?

 

I just think it is no longer one source. I was just taking some shots now and thinking! I thought that perhaps at one time, a singular consciousnesses existed and it died/transformed into what is now so many, it's unfathomable. I think there are many God's that perhaps came from one, but that was probably long long ago! I can't imagine that all the Christian images of what exists on the other side as being true. Even Jesus died and transformed. Transformation is what the shaman lives for, it's the only purpose and duty of our existence.

 

Your very appropriate reply proves that I was not being cryptic . What I didn't directly say was
I am still thinking on Socrates .
.
.

The following derived from today's contemplation of what I read of Socrates yesterday .


I am devoted to ____ , in the service of ____ , and I reference ____ .

Socrates : I am devoted to philosophy , in the service of my students , and I reference a divine
councilor who both inspires and gives my thoughts pause .

It's best for the world you are not devoted to Athieism , which = a nothingness .

 

And this obviously plays into your Atheism. Your use of the word "devotion" only shows more that Atheism is your Religion. You are devoted to a certain view of the ultimate nature of reality. This is Religion.

There's nothing wrong with logic and reason, but there's such thing as overvaluing it and defining it as the one and only truth or approach to finding truth.

This is the Consciousness Wars http://www.hipforums.com/forum/topic/472405-the-consciousness-wars/

 

^
Why/how is being devoted to a certain view of the ultimate nature of reality a religion on itself?


I hope Mr. Writer acknowledges that being devoted to reason is not really exclusive to non theists. Theists can be and are often devoted to reason just the same. Just because they have also use for concepts like faith or a creator or traditional rituals does not make that impossible or them less reasonable by default. Not sure if you disagree with that at all, it just sounds a bit like you think you are one of the few on these forums just because others think differently than you/reach different conclusions:

This stance could explain a lot. Because although I see a lot of people with different conclusions I see plenty of them being devoted to reason and making use of logic and evidence just the same. About being confused about the people who do not seem really busy with that (the ones who really aren't busy with that are generally easily spotted), what's confusing? These people have always been present in human history: they care more about being right, or about being heard, or about making fun of the other (not exclusive to unreasonable people of course ) etc. etc. etc. than just being and sounding reasonable.

About the kind of religious people who seem stuck in a fairytale because they live life by applying ancient religious views on reality, and really denounce reason and logic by doing so: I don't think you were talking about them as they seem not that common on these forums. Maybe you are simply deeply confused about certain fellow forummers because you misunderstand them? I mean you sometimes already seem to have trouble understanding how a smart person in this day and age (devoted to logic and reason) can still be a theist

 

There's no arguing with china because he has his very own special definition of religion and atheist and at a certain point becomes indistinguishable from the hf guy who thinks government and gay is a religion.

 

I have shown that my definition of Atheism and Agnosticism is the correct definition. As far as Atheism goes, the only thing that you guys are lacking is a ritual. Other than that, you're the exact same as Religion.

 

"Atheism is the position that affirms the non-existence of God. It proposes positive disbelief rather than the mere suspension of belief." -Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy

http://www.creation.com/atheism-a-religion

 

You're trippin', yo...

Outy... peace y'all

 

You did explain how you reached your conclusion, indeed. Most of us still disagree with it though. It's like concluding buddhism isn't a religion just because there is no god. The conclusion doesn't have to be a problem on itself, except if we get into a discussion specificly about religion(s) and we have different definitions Well, then it also doesn't have to be a problem (if we're really wise :-D), we would just have to agree to disagree.

 

Ninian Smart's Seven Dimensions of Religion is widely accepted by anthropologists and researchers of Religion as broadly covering what it means to define a religion. The 7 Dimensions are Narrative, Experiental, Social, Ethical, Doctrinal, Ritual, and Material.

The website I posted shows how Atheism acquires 6/7 of these, with only Ritual left out, and also points out how even this aspect is slowly becoming introduced. It also goes to show how Atheism's lack of defining itself as a Religion somewhat has to do with avoiding legal imperatives.

 

Atheism is at first a label/definition to define an individual's lack of a belief in God(s). It's not some kind of organized relgious club or defined with rules of how to be an atheist, that kind of thing. Just because some atheists are striving to create a meeting centre does not change that.
Just like that there are some christians are trying to live by what Jesus (supposedly) said and not going to church or focussing on a trinity or belief in Jesus' return on earth etc. does not stop making Christianity as a whole a religion, so does some strange atheists not make atheism primarily a religion. It is just a bare concept, a definition/label. There's nothing more connected to it by default, except maybe the urge to strive for reason and logic which made most atheists define themselves as such in the first place. Even if this urge can be called devotion it still does not make atheism a religion. Even if a lot of them would think they are the only ones really devoted to reason and logic that would not make their ideology a religion or religious: it just tends to make them kind of extremist (which clearly is not exlusive to religious folks). Just because their mindset/ideology and even behaviour at times have similarities with religions and can be compared with religious folks does not simply make the atheist mindset a religion as well. Do you agree?