• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Atheism is a religion [W:1586,2242]

KokomoJojo

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 17, 2014
Messages
7,544
Reaction score
1,503
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here is a interesting read I found on atheism that exemplifies to some extent the root philosophy and 'substantial' meaning of the word.

Here is how it works.

People absorb the environment around them. From this environment they sort out what they 'believe' on everything.

They sort what they believe as acceptable in one bin vs what they believe as unacceptable in another bin.

What they believe is the controlling factor in what and how they 'conduct themselves' throughout life.

Hence the substantial definition of religion is a 'belief that one acts upon'.

This is centered upon how the mind works in and of itself, not the final product or outcome of the process, though the outcome proves the process.

In other words if the final product is atheism or christian makes no difference, if a person governs themselves with regard to their beliefs no matter where derived it is when the will commits to action that it becomes officially 'their' religion.

In both cases the mind went through the same fundamental process as described above.

Atheism Is a Religion

Or at least it requires a God for you not to 'believe' in.

This does not prove God exists, but it does show humans are wired or biologically predisposed to believe in something. When I interviewed him for this article, Newberg said his research demonstrates that "we are wired to have these beliefs about the world, to get at the fundamental stuff the universe is about. For many people, it includes God and for some it doesn't. Your brain is doing its best to understand the world and construct beliefs to understand it, and from an epistemological perspective there is no fundamental difference."


So, whether you make sense of the world as an atheist and don't require the God postulate to complete your understanding, or you are a theist and your feelings and experiences tell you something greater is there, biologically speaking, that big blob of gray Jell-O in our skulls is like a giant arrow pointing us in the same direction. I believe that is delicious. And religious.

Atheism Is a Religion - Reason.com


I struggled to think of the appropriate language that could be a work around to the premise and have not come up with any other construction that made sense. Despite who or what we are it boils down to a set of personal 'beliefs'.

Everything we consciously process is a 'belief', whether those beliefs are true or false notwithstanding.

In other words atheists 'believe' God does not exist. Use of the negative results in the same and is purely semantic.
 
Last edited:
If religion is merely a belief upon which you act, then taking antibiotics for an infection makes medical science a religion too.

By casting the net out so broadly with this definition, you make everything a person does religious.
 
Plus the religious have summed up an omniscient, omnipotent non existent entity in order for their lives to be more meaningful. The atheists have not. How are atheists religious then?

People absorb the environment around them. From this environment they sort out what they 'believe' on everything.

They sort what they believe as acceptable in one bin vs what they believe as unacceptable in another bin.

What they believe is the controlling factor in what and how they 'conduct themselves' throughout life.

Hence the substantial definition of religion is a 'belief that one acts upon'.

So an atheist would believe in the laws of physics, and empirical data, and would act upon them alone. Are these purely scientific concepts religion also?
 
Here is a interesting read I found on atheism that exemplifies to some extent the root philosophy and 'substantial' meaning of the word.

Here is how it works.

People absorb the environment around them. From this environment they sort out what they 'believe' on everything.

They sort what they believe as acceptable in one bin vs what they believe as unacceptable in another bin.

What they believe is the controlling factor in what and how they 'conduct themselves' throughout life.

Hence the substantial definition of religion is a 'belief that one acts upon'.

This is centered upon how the mind works in and of itself, not the final product or outcome of the process, though the outcome proves the process.

In other words if the final product is atheism or christian makes no difference, if a person governs themselves with regard to their beliefs no matter where derived it is when the will commits to action that it becomes officially 'their' religion.

In both cases the mind went through the same fundamental process as described above.




I struggled to think of the appropriate language that could be a work around to the premise and have not come up with any other construction that made sense. Despite who or what we are it boils down to a set of personal 'beliefs'.

Everything we consciously process is a 'belief', whether those beliefs are true or false notwithstanding.

In other words atheists 'believe' God does not exist. Use of the negative results in the same and is purely semantic.

Of course it is a religion. Only Atheists hate the idea.
 
If religion is merely a belief upon which you act, then taking antibiotics for an infection makes medical science a religion too.

By casting the net out so broadly with this definition, you make everything a person does religious.

It is broad, the word was constructed to be broad imo. This is why I added that the end product being true or false really does not matter. You would have gathered up everything you believe and to conclude medical science is correct, you would have a large library of facts and proofs to convince yourself that your belief is correct and that if you take the antibiotics you will be fine and your belief when you are cured would merely prove your belief to be correct.

See what I mean the process is the same regardless of the subject matter.

That is just a couple elements used to keep the story brief, it can start getting a bit thick when concepts of 'free will' and a host of other elements respecting thoughts and conception are included but ends up in the same place that religion is a belief that is acted upon.

If your will and actions are not governed by you then they are governed by someone else.

I dont see where narrowing it to subject matter (God, or praying etc) has any greater value or changes the meaning? The process is identical is it not?
 
Last edited:
Of course it is a religion. Only Atheists hate the idea.

yeh according to that article they get a bit rattled over that.
 
Ok, good. Atheism is a religion. Now what? Why is this important to you?
 
It is broad, the word was constructed to be broad imo. This is why I added that the end product being true or false really does not matter. You would have gathered up everything you believe and to conclude medical science is correct, you would have a large library of facts and proofs to convince yourself that your belief is correct and that if you take the antibiotics you will be fine and your belief when you are cured would merely prove your belief to be correct.

See what I mean the process is the same regardless of the subject matter.

That is just a couple elements used to keep the story brief, it can start getting a bit thick when concepts of 'free will' and a host of other elements respecting thoughts and conception are included but ends up in the same place that religion is a belief that is acted upon.

If your will and actions are not governed by you then they are governed by someone else.

I dont see where narrowing it to subject matter (God, or praying etc) has any greater value or changes the meaning? The process is identical is it not?

Saying how each individual interprets the data available to us in this world constitutes a religious framework is certainly casting a wide net.

If you're trying to say we're all religious and no one shares the same religion that's fine, but its very far from how most people define the term.
 
Isn't odd that "religious" folk want "atheism" to be a religion so badly...yet fight so hard to discount actual religions as false.

If atheists claimed atheism was a religion..."religious" folk would be fighting with all their might to discount that claim.
 
Isn't odd that "religious" folk want "atheism" to be a religion so badly...yet fight so hard to discount actual religions as false.

If atheists claimed atheism was a religion..."religious" folk would be fighting with all their might to discount that claim.


I think that only goes to say that everyone is religious without regard to the final product or label you wish to put on it, but I agree that knife cuts both ways.
 
Saying how each individual interprets the data available to us in this world constitutes a religious framework is certainly casting a wide net.

If you're trying to say we're all religious and no one shares the same [exact] religion that's fine, but its very far from how most people define the term.

emphasis added [exact]

yes that is exactly what I am saying. you can take any number of people claiming to be the same religion and none of them believe identical beliefs. At best they align themselves within specific common grounds, and attach an appropriate label. So yes that is exactly what I am saying, religion is personal to the extreme and completely individual.
 
Atheism is a Religion
No, actually it isn't.

noun religion
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

noun atheism
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
 
No, actually it isn't.

noun religion
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

noun atheism
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

if the extent of your philosophical review ends at the dictionary then we have little to discuss.

Otherwise you might want to explain the substantial difference between;

1) I disbelieve in the existence of God.
2) I believe God does not exist.

As I said early these are nothing more than semantic word games.
 
if the extent of your philosophical review ends at the dictionary then we have little to discuss.
Words have meanings. Making up new meanings for words on a whim to support your assertion precludes intelligent discussion. Saying that atheism is a religion is ridiculous.

Otherwise you might want to explain the substantial difference between;

1) I disbelieve in the existence of God.
2) I believe God does not exist.
There is no difference. It's simply two ways of expressing the same non-religious viewpoint.
 
Words have meanings. Making up new meanings for words on a whim to support your assertion precludes intelligent discussion. Saying that atheism is a religion is ridiculous.

There is no difference. It's simply two ways of expressing the same non-religious viewpoint.

Of course words have meanings. What I presented here and what is being presented in the article is not a new meaning but a reduction to its essence. This dates back over 1000 years ago.

Anything you conceive and mentally process creates a belief, if you act upon that belief it is properly classified as your religion which has nothing to do with God or without God.

You admit its a belief, its not much of a leap to understand that its a religion when put into action.
 
Atheism is a label applied by theists (theism being a basic foudation of religious beief in the supernatural) to anyone not sharing that belief. The time honoured response of "How is bald a hair colour?" leaps to mind.
 
Atheism is a label applied by theists (theism being a basic foudation of religious beief in the supernatural) to anyone not sharing that belief. The time honoured response of "How is bald a hair colour?" leaps to mind.

I would argue that is one of several applications. Everything you just typed you 'belief' is correct. It extends beyond supernatural though generally through out the ages the main usage has been selling God.

The problem you are faced with is the semantics as I expressed earlier. It becomes circular. I have not found a way around that.
 
Here is the thing. To be a religion you need more than a thought.

To be a religion one starts with a belief system. While some atheists fall into this category (the belief that there is no God or Gods). Other simple do not believe in any God. It is unimportant to them.

Now to be a religion you also have to have a collectivity. Religion involves agreement with others. This is where atheism falls apart a little. Atheists tend not to seek other atheists to be atheists together. Now some humanists do this. But that is a subgroup that often is seeking a form of religion. Most atheists do not seek atheist groups to "do atheism".

Then you need ritual and practice. Something that expresses the a way of acting together. Atheism doesn't have this.

To call atheism a religion is not a philosophical argument, it a lazy way to attack them.
 
Plus the religious have summed up an omniscient, omnipotent non existent entity in order for their lives to be more meaningful. The atheists have not. How are atheists religious then?



So an atheist would believe in the laws of physics, and empirical data, and would act upon them alone. Are these purely scientific concepts religion also?

People turn science into a religion, it's called "Scientism".
 
Anything you conceive and mentally process creates a belief, if you act upon that belief it is properly classified as your religion which has nothing to do with God or without God.

No. You've broadened the meaning of religion as to rendered it meaningless. A religion is a set of beliefs about what happens after death.

In addition, I'm yet to see an atheist act on their non-belief in God.
 
First, the words were talking about here have different meanings in different contexts. Beyond that, they're used in various other ways, maybe incorrectly and with ulterior motives due to the strength of feeling and personal attachments associated with them.

Fundamentally, atheism means not having a belief in any god or gods. It doesn't necessarily incorporate anything else beyond that. Individual and groups of atheists can (and generally do) have all sorts of further associated beliefs and opinions which they may act upon but none of that is automatically fundamental to atheism. It is perfectly possible for someone to be atheist without any of those additional things; they just don't believe in any gods.

It's worth remembering that atheism isn't equivalent to an individual religion but equivalent to theism (the clue is in the name). It's really just the opposite of theism. If atheism itself were a religion, theism itself would be a religion and there wouldn't be all the diverse theistic religions that actually exist.

Formally, religion typically involves some kind of deliberate act. It's something you do rather than (just) something you believe. Atheism (and theism for that matter) doesn't require any such act and therefore can't be a religion in and of itself. Individual atheists can be religious and there are atheistic religions but, just as there are theistic religions, that doesn't make atheism (or theism) a religion.

Religion has a more casual definition which can relate beyond this context of course (you can religiously follow a sports team for example) and that can apply to how some people act in relation to their lack of belief in gods. Obviously that is even further from making atheism a religion by any formal definition.
 
Last edited:
No. You've broadened the meaning of religion as to rendered it meaningless. A religion is a set of beliefs about what happens after death.

Religion is more than a set of beliefs and does not require an after-death existence. Some don't historically.

In addition, I'm yet to see an atheist act on their non-belief in God.

This is true to some extent. This is something that is a big whole in the atheism=religion argument.
 
Plus the religious have summed up an omniscient, omnipotent non existent entity in order for their lives to be more meaningful. The atheists have not. How are atheists religious then?

While you have noted that of the majority, there are still plenty of religious people in the world today who have pantheons still. Not every religious person describes their deity as omniscient and/or omnipotent.

So an atheist would believe in the laws of physics, and empirical data, and would act upon them alone. Are these purely scientific concepts religion also?

Science can show cause/effect and help to proves which events are actual causation and which are merely correlation. This principle, however cannot be applied when dealing with deities, at least not at this stage of human and scientific development. Deities can be neither proven nor disproved, thus any stance one has on them is purely based upon belief and faith.
 
It's worth remembering that atheism isn't equivalent to an individual religion but equivalent to theism (the clue is in the name). It's really just the opposite of theism. If atheism itself were a religion, theism itself would be a religion and there wouldn't be all the diverse theistic religions that actually exist.

Formally, religion typically involves some kind of deliberate act. It's something you do rather than (just) something you believe. Atheism (and theism for that matter) doesn't require any such act and therefore can't be a religion in and of itself. Individual atheists can be religious and there are atheistic religions but, just as there are theistic religions, that doesn't make atheism (or theism) a religion.

I can agree with you here and say that both theism and atheism are really more spirituality states then religions per se'. My dad has often said, "Spirituality is for God. Religion is for man." Within that statement is the context of each person's deity is in place where he uses "God".

Religion has a more casual definition which can relate beyond this context of course (you can religiously follow a sports team for example) and that can apply to how some people act in relation to their lack of belief in gods. Obviously that is even further from making atheism a religion by any formal definition.

I would say that, at least in the US, "religion" is also used loosely to denote any type of spirituality or belief system. In regards to the bold line in the first quote, we could apply that logic to claim the Christianity is not a religion otherwise there wouldn't be all the diverse Christians religions that actually exist. Same holds true for Judaism and Islam.
 
Religion is more than a set of beliefs and does not require an after-death existence. Some don't historically.

Defining religion is tricky. I went with one that covers most religions and was easy to type.

This is true to some extent. This is something that is a big whole in the atheism=religion argument.

Some atheists are anti-religious, and their dislike of religion drives them to act against the religious. But none are driven by a lack of belief in a deity.
 
Back
Top Bottom