Religion At It's Finest

[Remy]

posting vids of comedians doing what they do best is HARDLY evidence...

You've got a pretty bizarre sense of humour if you think he was delivering stand-up comedy there, Dral. But you'll have to explain to me why someone's profession invalidates the intelligent points that they raise.

Besides which, what am I posting "evidence" of? This was meant to help people with reading comprehension problems. Maybe you fall into that category, but I don't have any other videos for you right now, sorry.

[Dral]

You've got a pretty bizarre sense of humour if you think he was delivering stand-up comedy there, Dral. But you'll have to explain to me why someone's profession invalidates the intelligent points that they raise.

Besides which, what am I posting "evidence" of? This was meant to help people with reading comprehension problems. Maybe you fall into that category, but I don't have any other videos for you right now, sorry.

have you been reading my posts in this thread ?

And look, I can discriminate against anyone for any reason I want to.... vegetarians... comedians....Leafs fans.... it doesn't have to make sense

[VICanucksfan5551]

Since this is right over your head I'll simplify it for you.

Atheism is the absolute belief that there is no God and no god exists. Even though there is no for certain evidence to prove that point. Atheists believe that there is absolute certainty that there is no God or divine beings or powers ect even though they can not prove that point.

It takes just as much belief or faith to be an Athiest as a Mormon or a Muslim or a Christian.

On the other hand, Agnostics which you keep confusing with Atheists don't believe in any god or any absolute non existence of a God.

There is a big difference.

Considering your supposed to be a teacher I'd figured you would have basic reading comprehension down. My bad.

I mean obviously you don't believe in god, but can you prove with absolute certainty that one does not exist? Show some proof?

With that nonsensical definition, I'd be surprised if there were any more than a handful of "true" atheists in the entire world. Literally no-one I know who considers themselves to be an atheist believes with absolute certainty that there is no god.

[Dral]

With that nonsensical definition, I'd be surprised if there were any more than a handful of "true" atheists in the entire world. Literally no-one I know who considers themselves to be an atheist believes with absolute certainty that there is no god.

so if they don't believe with absolute certainty... they just have faith ?

[VICanucksfan5551]

so if they don't believe with absolute certainty... they just have faith ?

Or a reasoned provisional conclusion based upon the evidence, or lack thereof.

[Dral]

Or a reasoned provisional conclusion based upon the evidence, or lack thereof.

you say potato I say vodka

[DefCon1]

You know how I'm sure that you're out of your depth here? You didn't actually respond to any of the points I brought up, which were direct dissections of the crap you posted. Saying "it's over your head" doesn't make it so, especially when you lack the wit to reply to the valid points I've raised.

An atheist does not require absolute proof, so you're way off on that. Look, I'll even provide some more information for you to help ease this along for you:

I'm sorry in advance that he uses some big words, I know that will be tough for you, but stick it out and you might get the gist of it.

You can make an argument but there is no need to be condescending when you are trying to prove a point. Plus, posting a bunch of youtube videos from such famous scholars like Bill Maher isn't really going to validate your point of view in any way.

At first, the claim that atheism is a religion might sound ridiculous.

It certainly can be a surprising claim.

And it’s one that many people, including western atheists, might initially dismiss out of hand.

But there’s more to the story here.

There is a case to be made that, in a very real sense, atheism is a religion.

A Word About Words

Words mean what people use them to mean. So whether atheism counts as a religion will depend on how you use the term “atheism” and how you use the term “religion.”

There is no single right way or wrong way to use terms. Their boundaries can be drawn differently by different people, and their meanings can change over time.

As a result, I’m not going to be claiming in this piece that there is a single right or wrong way to define our two terms.

In fact, I don’t really care about the terms. What I’m interested in is the reality that the two terms represent.

My claim, therefore, is that the reality of what is commonly called “atheism” has much in common with the reality of what is commonly called “religion.”

The two have so much in common that there is a sense in which atheism can be seen as a religion.

“Are You A Christian?”

A prima facie or “at first glance” case for the claim that atheism can be seen as a religion can be found in the answer an atheist might give to the question “Are you a Christian?”

When presented with this question, an atheist may reply, “No, I’m an atheist.”

On the other hand, if he was instead presented with the question, “Are you a Jew?” he might again reply, “No, I’m an atheist.”

If he had been asked, “Are you a Buddhist?” or “Are you a Muslim?” or “Are you a Hindu?” he might well give the same answer: “No, I am an atheist.”

This suggests that being an atheist is analogous to being a Christian, a Jew, a Buddhist, a Muslim, or a Hindu.

And that, in turn suggests that atheism is analogous to Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, and Hinduism.

In other words, atheism, too, can be seen as a religion.

Now let’s ask a question that will let us go deeper into the subject . . .

Why?

Why is it possible to view atheism as a religion?

A good starting point is asking what the different religions have in common.

This is a potentially vast discussion, as the field of comparative religion shows.

Many of the definitions of religion (and there are many) get into rather deep and abstract waters (e.g., whatever your “ultimate commitment” is, etc.).

We can’t go into all the possible definitions in a blog post, but I would like to propose what strikes me as a commonsense, functional definition of religion.

It is a definition that will distinguish between the things we normally think of as religions and those we normally do not.

Before we get to that, though, we need to define our first term . . .

What Is Atheism?

Atheism can be defined in different ways, but for purposes of this piece, I will be using the term “atheism” to refer to standard western atheism—that is, to the view that rejects the existence of God or the gods, that there is no afterlife, and that the material universe is all that is real.

There can be and are other understandings of atheism, but this is the paradigmatic version of atheism in the west, and it’s what we will be considering here.

Also, for purposes of this post, we won’t be going into the difference between the “God positively does not exist” version of atheism and the “I can’t positively rule out the existence of God, but I don’t have convincing evidence, so I don’t believe in him” version of atheism.

For purposes of simplicity, we’ll treat them both as a rejection of the existence of God/the gods.

Same thing goes for “the afterlife positively does not exist” atheism and “I don’t have good evidence, so I don’t believe in the afterlife” atheism.

What Religion Is

In this piece, I will use the term “religion” as follows:

Something is a religion if it has a position on the divine and/or the afterlife.

By “the divine” I mean God or the gods.

By “the afterlife” I mean “the afterlife”—what, if anything, happens to us after death.

A more technical definition could be proposed (e.g., “X is a religion if and only if . . .”), but what I’ve suggested is a functional definition that one works fairly well for distinguishing the things we call religions from those we don’t.

In what follows, for purposes of simplicity, we’ll be looking at religions in their classical forms, not every possible variant of them.

We will, however, take note of two notable historical variations, one of Buddhism and one of Judaism, because they are fairly well-known and have a bearing on our subject.

Things That Aren’t Religions

Things that aren’t religions under this definition include mathematics, boatbuilding, the culinary arts, square dancing, and virtually all of the other things we normally don’t consider religions.

They don’t have a position on the existence of the divine or the afterlife, so they’re not religions.

Of particular note, belief in evolution is not a religion—despite the claims of some Creationists.

One can believe in the existence of evolution without taking a position on the divine or the afterlife.

On the other hand, belief in evolution can take on a religious dimension if, e.g., it is proposed as a reason to either reject or accept belief in the divine or the afterlife.

But then that’s true of anything that is proposed as a reason to reject or accept belief in the divine or the afterlife.

Now let’s turn to viewpoints that do have a position on these matters . . .

There is definitely two sides to this argument, so I will say that you aren't totally wrong but you aren't right either.

[DefCon1]

You've got a pretty bizarre sense of humour if you think he was delivering stand-up comedy there, Dral. But you'll have to explain to me why someone's profession invalidates the intelligent points that they raise.

Besides which, what am I posting "evidence" of? This was meant to help people with reading comprehension problems. Maybe you fall into that category, but I don't have any other videos for you right now, sorry.

Those videos don't really add to the discussion. If you want to prove a point, maybe post a peer reviewed journal article discussing whether Atheism is a religion or not.

[Twilight Sparkle]

Those videos don't really add to the discussion. If you want to prove a point, maybe post a peer reviewed journal article discussing whether Atheism is a religion or not.

"atheists" are just as crazy as everyone else

[Dral]

"atheists" are just as crazy as everyone else

the only sane ones in this world are the ones who believe in the holy sanctity of MLP, amirite ?

[Dral]

So much identity politics and war over minute semantics going on here. You'd think there are better things to talk about.

You'd be right if this was the UN security council, but it's not.... it's CDC..... during the off season. You should know better

Now go watch some DC

[Twilight Sparkle]

the only sane ones in this world are the ones who believe in the holy sanctity of MLP, amirite ?

equestria has its own problems. at one point we had "occupy canterlot" for christ's sake

[Dral]

equestria has its own problems. at one point we had "occupy canterlot" for christ's sake

lol, that made my day

[g_bassi13]

So much identity politics and war over minute semantics going on here. You'd think there are better things to talk about.

You'd think, right?

You'd think people would be bigger than caring about whether or not some random person on the internet believes in God or not.

You'd think people wouldn't treat non-belief as a threat to their own faith, or treat religion as a "plague" on society, and some deluded fantasy.

You don't need to put down the person because of why they do or don't believe, or the method that they came to their understanding.

No one has to agree with everyone, that's not the point. Just that you'd hope respect to be a lot more prevalent on what is an obviously personal issue.

I understand that certain people have a reason to feel a lot more personal about said issues than others, but it doesn't mean you have to avoid decorum when discussing these things with others.

Not that these discussions aren't filled with people respectfully stating their opinions (some with complete respect for the other side), and others attempting to mediate things. But these things find a way to keep sprouting out so vitriolically so frequently.

I realise that I'm putting myself on an obvious high horse here by saying what I am, but seriously, seeing this stuff come up time and time again, with the same people just repeating themselves in high opposition to others, at some point you'd expect better. I'm going to continue to mainly avoid these threads, because I know they aren't going away.

[GLASSJAW]

watching all of these clips, two things: wow, bill maher isn't funny

and two: it's such a shame that hitchens is dead. less of a shame, but still unfortunate, is how the last years of his life had him bloated and sweating on various stages essentially repeating the exact same essay and then 'debating it' over, and over, and over, and over again. it was like a greatest hits tour, with a one song setlist that lasted 5 years

[Dral]

vote g_bassi

obvious mafia

[Jai604]

Just to clear things up, Atheists, real Atheists, if presented with substantial evidence that god exists, would change their minds. At this point in time, there isn't enough evidence as of yet. That isn't to say that it's impossible that evidence exists, but until such time that evidence is presented, there is no reason to believe a god exists.

The burden of proof lies on the one making assertions. If you assert god exists, you have to provide evidence. Atheists simply don't believe in something for which there is no evidence. There is no assertion that god doesn't exist. Simply, atheists believe there is no reason to believe a god exists because there simply is no information or data to back that up. Essentially the probability of god existing, due to the evidence presented so far, is so low, it would be illogical to believe in a god.

Atheism isn't a be-all-end-all belief that god does not exist.

[Bill Sikes]

Heretic at times it is impossible to have a rational , logical discussion with you

I am not on a getting even crusade as you so dramatically claim , i am involved in a discussion on a internet forum.

It was people driven by their religious beliefs that did those awful things.

If getting even means discussing and sometimes taking the piss out of the fables that constitute religious beliefs then yes . i will be always getting even.

I see I am not the only one who sees this, BTW he's only difficult to reason with on days that end with the letter Y.

[Heretic]

I see I am not the only one who sees this, BTW he's only difficult to reason with on days that end with the letter Y.

Now that's funny!

[Remy]

You can make an argument but there is no need to be condescending when you are trying to prove a point.

In fairness, DefCon1, my post wasn't directed at you. It was directed at someone (pretty clearly, since I quoted them) that made some direct personal insults. So you'll forgive me if I replied condescendingly.