are you an atheist?

I speak of a subtype of militant atheists who I’ll call the “Reddit Atheists.” These are the folks who have, ironically, adopted the attitudes of hardcore evangelicals who try to convert strangers on subway platforms

I bet there's a nontrivial difference between these two groups of people that even the writer can figure out if given ample time. I'll start the clock.

As an atheist, my only real opposition to religion and spiritual belief existing at all is I feel that the human race collectively would be more open to the search for new information, and ignorance without religious ideology wouldn't have a reason to slow that down.

people are going to do fucked up shit whether through religion or not since religion in that sense is just a means to an end

for sure. the question is whether a lack of religion would decrease the degree and frequency of people doing fucked up shit. thinking there's no chance it wouldn't reflects a cynical view on humanity that doesn't do anyone any good imo.

reddit-style richard dawkins atheists never seem to brush on things like that, or say like "we're going to be atoms one day - yeah!" which really means jack shit imo since you can't perceive squat when you don't exist.

Perception (at least the 3D 'Real World' phenomenon we take that to mean) is overrated imo. It's rather unfortunate and ironic that many who describe themselves as atheists or strict materialists still place immense importance on personal perception.

Thomas Nagel reviews Alvin Plantinga, a philosophical defender of religious belief:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/sep/27/philosopher-defends-religion/

So what is our fight about? The fact I take a radical stance. He says there's no way you can do that.

My wife and I differ in our beliefs. But we know better than to fight about it (actually I'm not sure why we don't, but we don't). Instead, we emphasize common ground, of which there is a surprisingly large area, and I mainly concern myself with whether her beliefs are likely to lead to actions that do any kind of harm to herself or others. If they pass that test, I just listen and nod my head and let her think what pleases her.

reddit-style richard dawkins atheists never seem to brush on things like that, or say like "we're going to be atoms one day - yeah!" which really means jack shit imo since you can't perceive squat when you don't exist.

Perception (at least the 3D 'Real World' phenomenon we take that to mean) is overrated imo. It's rather unfortunate and ironic that many who describe themselves as atheists or strict materialists still place immense importance on personal perception.

― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Monday, September 24, 2012 11:38 AM (1 minute ago)

Agreed, but I'm curious where you've seen examples of atheists do this. Not a challenge just would like to see.

"people are going to do fucked up shit whether through religion or not"

the kind of fucked up shit people do outside of religion is going to be limited to putting sardines on pizza, or putting human clothing on animals and taking pictures of them. it's very hard to think of egregious examples that don't have at least some religious flavor to them. it's almost tautological that really fucked up shit is going to involve religion, even if it's a religion of one.

Oh, boy, that book review o. nate linked to. "Evangelical Protestant believes theists are rubber, atheists are glue, and that the latter have something broken in their brains. Also, lots of special pleading! Film at 11."

for sure. the question is whether a lack of religion would decrease the degree and frequency of people doing fucked up shit. thinking there's no chance it wouldn't reflects a cynical view on humanity that doesn't do anyone any good imo.

Some social ills would be eliminated w/o religion, but secular society isn't some grand fantasy land of lovely pro-human rationalism. We still have consumerism, wage slavery, paranoia, fear, xenophobia, nationalism, ideology and politics, etc. In the US we utterly destroyed a nation and peaced out for what? Profit, fear, and the inherent flaws in human thinking. We're never not going to be flawed, religion or not. We can't scapegoat religion for our own shortcomings as a species.

Perception (at least the 3D 'Real World' phenomenon we take that to mean) is overrated imo. It's rather unfortunate and ironic that many who describe themselves as atheists or strict materialists still place immense importance on personal perception.

Just meant this in a way where a story is told to comfort us in the present when it has no bearing on the likely ultimate reality of returning to non-existence. It's a salve like religion... the reality of our lives is utterly maddening since it's some strange after effect that we're conscious anyway, so it doensn't matter what cure you pick ... atoms, after life, living on through the people whose lives you nuture. I'd rather pick the third option anyway.

the kind of fucked up shit people do outside of religion is going to be limited to putting sardines on pizza, or putting human clothing on animals and taking pictures of them. it's very hard to think of egregious examples that don't have at least some religious flavor to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Gein

I guess this could be seen as a variation of putting human clothing on animals, so to speak

"consumerism, wage slavery, paranoia, fear, xenophobia, nationalism, ideology and politics"

i don't think you can magically whisk away religion, but if you could, these things would generally disappear as well.

re: ed gein, death cults count as religions, too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer

not sure how this matches up to putting sardines on a pizza

it's almost tautological that really fucked up shit is going to involve religion

I beg to differ.

Wars are about as fucked up as any shit any human ever does and although they are sometimes started over religious differences, far more often they're started out of greed, pride, or fear. When a nation goes to war, it is normal for them to make passionate declarations about the need for doing it and the causes that justify it, and religion is often invoked in this context, but merely as a smokescreen for greed, pride or fear.

it's very hard to think of egregious examples that don't have at least some religious flavor to them.

This is hugely different from saying that these egregious examples are somehow sanctioned within or motivated by religion. People are enormously capable of rationalizing their motives. Just because their rationalizations drag religion into the conversation does not mean it had any fundamental culpability for them doing what they wanted badly to do and would no doubt have done in any event.

"consumerism, wage slavery, paranoia, fear, xenophobia, nationalism, ideology and politics"

i don't think you can magically whisk away religion, but if you could, these things would generally disappear as well.

??? C'mon.

As a confirmed atheist and materialist, I am not confident that, if religion were swept away tomorrow, that I could convince people who can't even use turn signals to do away with nationalism and consumerism.

Spectrum, what about truth for its own sake? Having fewer false beliefs is intrinsically good, even if it won't help us to avoid death. We can at least try to understand what sort of universe it is that's killing us.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_bundy

I suppose being socipathically crazy also counts as a religion

Religion's role in war is overwhelmingly just the tool those at the top use to further their own economical gain, historically.

And as far as what would or wouldn't exist if religion was suddenly whisked away, in my opinion, it would be the endless opposition to scientific discovery, and the collective openness to these discoveries. Without religion, I believe that even the most ignorant people would be less inclined to hold on to ideology regardless, and as a race we would have been much farther along.

i dont think people's stated motivations for the things they do always line up perfectly with the various other determinants of their behavior.

like, it's kinda weird to think they do?

I'll let Spectrum and Atheist fight this one I guess but Nunez's claims are ridiculous

lol Atheist = Aimless

what is greed, pride, or fear but aspects of religion?

i think an example that on first glance doesn't seem religious and just the unfortunate accident of mental illness (the dark knight shootings) would lead a lot of people to be defensive about violent imagery not being responsible for violence, but I do think there is some measure of cause and effect -- there is somethings self-serious and religious about the series that say the schumaker batman probably could not have elicited.

what is greed, pride, or fear but aspects of religion?

lol whut I can't even

maybe you should start by telling us what your definition of "religion" is

what is greed, pride, or fear but aspects of religion?

congratulations on asking the dumbest question ever written on ILX

Some social ills would be eliminated w/o religion

Ok then! Isn't that a good enough reason to have beef w/it?

Pizza is orginally from Naples so I tend to think of putting sardines on pizza as far less blasphematory than putting on fucking pineapple.

hm... i take back what i said about pizza toppings. that shit can escalate to religious warfare pretty easily.

Your line of thinking strikes me as "ok, we can cure your cancer, but you're still gonna have arthritis, IBS, GERD, depression, htn, and gout" "ugh fuck it, don't bother with the cancer cure"

all of humanity's collective irrational behavior being impossible without religion, i stand by though.

Without ignorance. That's surely what you mean.

all of humanity's collective irrational behavior being impossible without religion

have you heard of this guy Stalin. Or Mao maybe. or, I dunno, capitalism.

stalin, mao, capitalism could all easily be deities in some neil gaiman story.

If anything, religion is an effect of humanity's collective irrational behavior, not a cause.

I think I became an atheist so young because all of the traditions I encountered seemed very likely to portray a God made in our image rather than the other way around, because there seemed to be a lot of special pleading and bad faith arguments and because the glaring hypocrisy was the only thing that interrupted the tedium of going to church.

The first step to solving a problem is a correct understanding of the problem. I think philip still needs some work on this step before he succeeds in solving all our problems.

The moral argument for religion is either faintly patronizing or irrelevant. If William James had his way, we'd be religious to be happier or better ppl, and that's fine, but it has nothing to do with real faith.

it's a problem to be managed. it's not a solvable problem. and in your heart of hearts would you want it to be solved problem? without religion there'd be no disneyland, and most people prefer nolan's batman to camp.

Your line of thinking strikes me as "ok, we can cure your cancer, but you're still gonna have arthritis, IBS, GERD, depression, htn, and gout" "ugh fuck it, don't bother with the cancer cure"

I see what you're saying here, but I don't think that's an accurate parallel ... religion as manifestation of inherent human nature and how that nature is "modular" (can use different tools to accomplish same/similar ends), vs. the linear progression of science.

Say with science, pharm companies cure illnesses with their medicines ... great! Then marketing comes along, prescibes ineffective/dangerous medicine to people, and these people die ... lives ended, families shattered when science meets human motivation and imperfection. It seems like science has killed more US citizens for ill/misguided motives in recent years than religion has within our borders (pharmaceuticals, industrials, manufacturing, energy technology, etc.).

ack! my last post sounds too condescending. still think it is true, but really, I just mean, really. Shape up, aimless.

social utilitarian atheists are maddening, its so obviously a replacement of one ideology w another/reaction formation, the need for hope is exactly the same as christians' but the vision is even more impoverished and boring if that's possible. *barfs*

xp phil D. kind of otm, the best religions are at least aware of what runs deep in the psyche and are kind of ambivalent about it. rationality evangelists are like... but statistics and the science industry, the great hope of humanity! i am going to tell myself these lies in order to ignore what constitutes real exploitation and brutality!

"Then marketing comes along,"

just because snake oil salesmen and faith healers have dressed themselves up as big pharma doesn't mean they are no longer of the cloth.

the negative aspects of religion stem from tribalism, us vs them thinking (not a coincident that the most virulent strains/perversions of religion today are located in areas of the globe where tribalism is also strong). symptom vs cause like Phil D said.

i think tribalism is a good thing inasmuch as its opposite is alienation, is it possible to imagine a global kinship? *sings imagine*

us vs them thinking requires a unifying divine mandate to sustain itself. religion isn't a symptom, it is fuel.

so chimps require unifying divine mandate to fuel their us vs them thinking?

ape shall not kill ape

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGMuIyBK5P4