Anonymous- Atheism: The organized anti-organized-religion religion.
Me- And not collecting stamps is a hobby
Anonymous- But you cant say that it's not a "Not Hobby" hobby. Some people might just really dislike stamps and are united in personally disagreeing with stamp collectors who think stamps are great. Sure, just because you don't see any postage on the envelope is not evidence enough to say that there might be a stamp there, but that also doesn't mean that there isn't any postage at all. Maybe it's pre-paid postage . . .
Me-.Yeah, I get your point, but that still wouldn't make it a religion. Uniting with others in disbelief doesn't make something a religion. Nothing like a doctrine or dogma necessarily follows from "God is not real". There are humanist, scientific, skeptical, and other philosophies that may follow, not from necessity but from proclivity and there may be some atheists that do follow something that resembles religion but religion does not necessarily follow atheism.
Anonymous- I see you point as well, but I would argue that there are some religions that DO follow atheism. Buddhism does not advocate the belief of any gods as everything is an illusion. Jainism is a religion of self-reliance and self- control, god's need not apply. Also, LaVeyan Satanism, which is almost literally a"Not Hobby" hobby. An almost anti-religion religion. etc. I agree with you on your above point, but I would argue that the term atheism no longer only implies "no-god" but has become some kind of weird hipster anti-religion religion that pits Science (with a capital S) against religion in general. Those two things couldn't be more different, I'm certain there are many brilliant scientist who might also happen to be Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Zoroastrians, etc.
Me-Yes, many people who are atheists are also the things you listed above as well as humanists, skeptics, and many other things that have nothing to do with god. This does not make atheism a religion. Atheism is one thing: A non-belief or a lack of belief. You cannot, logically, get from atheism to buddhism, Jainism or even humanist philosophy, but yes atheism is sometimes or often associated with these things. You cannot get from point A to point B simply because atheism has no doctrine, no dogma, no charter or guide book. You can be a libertarian, homeopath psychic who thinks bunnies are leaders of a conspiracy to control humans by way of drug injected easter eggs and still be an atheist.
Oh, and to call the modern atheist movement as "some kind of weird hipster anti-religion religion that pits Science (with a capital S) against religion in general" dismisses the often genuine, thoughtful, and concerned people who are behind it. Many of these people are not out to necessarily eradicate religion but rather keep it out of places where it doesn't belong. Places where it has held sway for millenia for no just or defensible reason. Many atheists are okay with people believing what they wish and I am certainly one of those. Certainly not all atheists, but we don't claim to be a cohesive movement. I would say that rational, humanist atheist share this sentiment, however. If you listen to or read many of the most prominent you will find this. I do believe that, in whole, the world would be a better place if we lived our lives, based our laws, and generally believed things based on the best evidence we can muster rather than on faith. I don't see much value in the religious kind of faith. I also feel that some aspects of religion are good, but I don't think that these aspects are exclusive to religion. These things being community, charity, ceremony, etc.
Atheism has been quiet for a very long time. It's had to for it's survival. In the last two centuries it has slowly gained a voice. This is largely because of science(with a lower case s). Science has given it backing. Science doesn't say atheism is true it just says many religious ideas are false. And because science is so powerful and visible in our daily lives, religious societies are having a harder and harder time refuting it. On the other hand, religion still is a very powerful force in our country and many others. To suggest that atheism is a bully, as some Christians do, is not paying attention to history.
Anonymous 2- There is a difference between a 'positive' view denying the existence of a deity and a 'negative' view which holds that the existence of a deity cannot be supported solely by rational argumentation. My father was an ‘atheist’ in this latter sense; however, he used the term loosely. He would be just as happy to call himself an ‘agnostic;’ -- it simply didn’t matter to him because he thought question of whether there is a god was, from a dialectical materialist point of view, immaterial (pun intended. ) I am most intrigued by people who assert ‘positively’ that there is no god. With such atheists I have had most illuminating conversations. In the end, though, it seems to me that ontological debates reduce to duelling tautologies. Yet the very fact that such tautologies exist fascinates me no end. It says more about human intellection than it does about any being exterior to human experience, but epistemology is one of my favourite studies.
Me- Atheism is a term of belief, not knowledge. I hold both the first and the second view you state. Neither of which claim absolute knowledge. Atheism is a claim of belief or rather lack of it. I believe there is no god and I believe that rational evidence also doesn't support a belief in it. What you are talking about is the difference between gnostic and agnostic. Gnostics claim knowledge, agnostics do not. You will find many atheists if not most, including myself, to be agnostic, although not all. Most Christians on the other hand would be in the gnostic category. None of this, however, proves that atheism is a religion.
Calling atheism a religion is just a way of saying, "See! Your basis of belief is no more subjective or rational than ours!". It is flat out wrong however. I point out in the argument above that not believing in God is to religion as not collecting stamps is to a hobby. Anonymous tries to refute this by saying that there could be people who incorporate not collecting stamps into some sort of anti-stamp club therefore making it a hobby. What he doesn't see here is that yes, that would be considered a hobby just as incorporating atheism into doctrine of a religious type makes it part of a religion. And he points to this in his next response giving some kinds of Buddhism and Jainism as examples of religions that are atheistic in nature. The difference is that THEY ARE RELIGIONS! Atheism is not a religion. Incorporating atheism into a religion then makes that religion an atheistic religion. It looks like this:
ATHEISM= NOT RELIGION
ATHEISM+RELIGION= RELIGIONThere is a popular atheist saying that goes something like, "Christians are atheists to all other gods. We just go one step further". Not believing in Zeus is not a religion. Not believing in Vishnu is not a religion. Unless, of course, part of your religious doctrine says "you shall worship no other gods before me". Now you've got a religion on your hands. See the difference?
