A Question for Atheists

[RedDragon94]

You'll note that they largely ignore Judaism.

True, but there is one that has called attention to Judaism before. Sam Harris.

I mean, atheists are fairly critical of New Age movements as well.

Well, all the atheist arguments I've heard and especially on this site are aimed at Abrahamic religions.

 

[RedDragon94]

No. If I lived in an Islamic society, I would probably be spending most of my time "doubting and systematically disproving" Islam. In India, might very well be Hinduism. Etc. In the US, the dominant religion is Christianity and the dominant threat to secularism is from Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists. That makes Christianity special in some limited way, I suppose.

I guess we'll never know for sure.

 

[LuisDantas]

A belief system that is driven by experience instead of what I will call impersonal beliefs. (By impersonal beliefs I mean beliefs based off of something read or heard.)

Then I would hope all of religion to be in fact existentialist. There seems to be little point in a religion that is not.

A belief system that values the sort of naturalness of life. I haven't read or heard enough Kierkegaard yet to tell you.

Any particular reason why we are talking about existentialism and Kierkegaard specifically?

 

[LuisDantas]

True, but there is one that has called attention to Judaism before. Sam Harris.

Well, all the atheist arguments I've heard and especially on this site are aimed at Abrahamic religions.

Does Kardecism count as an alternative target?

It is very rare for a Hindu, Pagan or Shintoist to attempt to proselitise us, so we naturally tend to leave well enough alone.

 

[RedDragon94]

Then I would hope all of religion to be in fact existentialist. There seems to be little point in a religion that is not.




Any particular reason why we are talking about existentialism and Kierkegaard specifically?

Well you know Kierkegaard was the founding father of existentialism so he's probably got some things in common with Buddha, at least I would think. I saw a video and he was actually influenced by Christianity, something i did not realize before.

 

[RedDragon94]

Does Kardecism count as an alternative target?

It is very rare for a Hindu, Pagan or Shintoist to attempt to proselitise us, so we naturally tend to leave well enough alone.

I guess, I mean it's not Abrahamic. So you don't care what a person believes as long as they leave you alone?

 

[LuisDantas]

Well you know Kierkegaard was the founding father of existentialism so he's probably got some things in common with Buddha, at least I would think.

Probably. Wise men tend to gravitate towards common ground. Still, why specifically existentialism and Buddhism? IIRC you introduced existentialism in this thread without much of an introduction or justification.

Not that I mind existentialism, but it seemed to come out of nowhere.

I saw a video and he was actually influenced by Christianity, something i did not realize before.

Europeans can not choose not to be influenced by Christianity. They will be judged by Christian parameters no matter what, even if they would rather not.

 

[RedDragon94]

you introduced existentialism in this thread without much of an introduction or justification.

Rabbit trail. You said something that made me think of it.

Europeans can not choose not to be influenced by Christianity. They will be judged by Christian parameters no matter what, even if they would rather not.

And at the same time modern Europe is becoming increasingly Atheistic or Islamic.

 

[LuisDantas]

I guess, I mean it's not Abrahamic. So you don't care what a person believes as long as they leave you alone?

If we are talking about theistic beliefs specifically, then sure, I would like to believe that to be true and I think it is not too temerary to assume that it is.

If they show the desire and the ability to accept me as I am and deal respectfully with me, then I can hardly ask for much more.

Of course, I am rarely accused of being a reasonable person, so who knows.


That said, there are situations where I feel somewhat responsible for other people's beliefs and their consequences, for various reasons. Many but not all are in some sense a reaction to supernaturalistic proselitism of some kind, usually involving some sort of demand that others should belief and/or fear a deity or an afterlife of some sort.

I don't mind other people's beliefs if they do not harm others... but even without proselitism (admitedly a major concern), there are still fanatical parents and politicians to consider, to mention two major, particularly obvious exceptions. In practice it is nearly always an oversimplification to say that someone does not affect others.

Kardecism specifically I target with a passion because I have seen first hand how harmful it is.

 

[LuisDantas]

Rabbit trail. You said something that made me think of it.

And at the same time modern Europe is becoming increasingly Atheistic or Islamic.

It is only natural, albeit for opposing reasons.

Islam is in some senses Christianity (or a variety of it) on overdrive, while Atheism is a natural consequence of questioning some Christian traditions that have been transmited to this day as central to the faith (properly or otherwise).

Christian people who feel enough of a drive to have strong, reliable traditions, reassurance of an unchanging scripture or to feel faith brotherhood with as many people as numerically possible can easily feel drawn towards Islam, particularly seeing how it makes a point of presenting itself as a refinement or successor to Christianity instead of properly a rival to it.

On the other hand, people who originate in a Christian social environment that gives them enough of an education and personal freedom for them to make the proper questions will often conclude that they have neither reason nor need nor vocation to truly believe in a deity - and at least in its current form Christianity does not quite accept them when they do.

 

[Bunyip]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

That is one of those 'when did you stop beating your wife?' questions.

I think the assumption that atheists are adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith is misplaced.

 

[gsa]

True, but there is one that has called attention to Judaism before. Sam Harris.

Well, all the atheist arguments I've heard and especially on this site are aimed at Abrahamic religions.

Many others have called attention to Judaism. Notably, atheist Jews. As for critiques of New Age thought, do a search of Deepak Chopra. Like this thread. Or this one. Plenty of atheist criticism of Hinduism and other dharmic religions. It just takes on a different flavor, because it isn't atheism per se that these religions have a problem with, but materialism and skepticism.

 

[Jumi]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

Would you be as adamant in condemning atheists if you knew you were wrong?

 

[David M]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

I'm not American and in the UK about 2/3 of adults are not religious so its not dominant at all.

Christianity is not special as a religion. I am adamant about doubting and demonstrating the complete lack of evidence for every religion every time they think its Ok to enforce their religious rules on others.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

I just as adamantly oppose all religions, it's just that Christianity tends to be the one we argue against most of the time for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the majority of atheists come from countries in which is most popular and powerful religion is Christianity, and we are hence exposed to Christian beliefs and arguments much more than any other religion and are generally raised with a much better understanding of it than any other religion. Secondly, Christian individuals and organizations tend to be the most willing to engage in debates (at least, on English-speaking forums and other predominantly western discussion methods) with atheists. Thirdly, many atheists feel that the negative aspects of Christianity are airbrushed over, with Christianity's predominant image (especially in the west) of being a near un-reproachable philosophy - while religions such as Islam tend to be treated in many forms of media as having powerful negative influence; though I would argue this may be less of a case of media bias (though that certainly plays a part) and more a form of confirmation bias. Christianity, for all it's negative aspects, is still "normalized" in western culture, while to many western people middle-eastern cultures and religions still tend to be unknown and alien. Fourthly, the Catholic church remains the single most powerful religious institution on the planet, and so it is a fairly easy target for criticism.

I'm sure other members will have thought of many more reasons for this perceived tendency towards criticising Christianity over any other religion.

 

[David M]

Well, all the atheist arguments I've heard and especially on this site are aimed at Abrahamic religions.

English speaking site. For the English speakers on this forum I would say that the majority hail from countries where the Abrahamic religions have had the most influence.

In addition it is the Abrahamic religions that tend to try and influence civil society the most when it comes to most western countries, and especially the US.

 

[Thief]

Logically, belief and disbelief have nothing to do with the majority vs minority religion. Belief is not chosen. Practices are.

I dont have quarms with christianity. I do find the belief system off in regards to no one knows what the real teaching of Jesus is only hearsay and personal experiences explanations.

Plus, I havent been exposed to God as a relationship with Him. He always existed as an abstract concept that under the label, many many religions have definitions for.

I dont need proof or anything like that. The belief never was a part of my mindset. It was something I learned personally three years ago and backed out when I found out the beliefs are no where near my own.

I cant speak for all. I notice atheist have revations that they are not God believers. Others have never believed all their lives.

I always wondered about qurstions like this. Are you wondering "how" a person can Not believe in God?

I must disagree.
Belief IS a matter of choice.
The practice and dogma are greatly varied.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

You can replace the Christian variable with any religious claim in the world and I'll still happily debunk it.
So no. Christianity isn't special at all - it's just the biggest elephant in the room.

 

[leibowde84]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

I'm not an atheist, but I don't think this change would make any difference. Every religion should be challenged, not only by atheists, but by its own adherents. One thing that is extremely dangerous is to allow any belief system to go "un-checked".

That being said, Christianity asks for it. Christians are vocal about their prejudice against the homosexual lifestyle, reproductive rights, marriage rights, etc. While they are all welcomed to their beliefs, if you start injecting them into the political spectrum, you are going to get ridiculed in return. That is just how free societies work. And the notion that religious beliefs should get special protection against ridicule is a thing of the past, which is a great thing.

 

[leibowde84]

I must disagree.
Belief IS a matter of choice.
The practice and dogma are greatly varied.

How can you choose to believe something you see as unsupported and unbelievable? One can't force themselves to believe something they think is not trustworthy.