Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
Well, it is tangentially attached, because it seems to me that atheism should be understood as a positive belief system in the 21st century Western world.Yeah, this isn't really relevant to the issue at hand.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Well, it is tangentially attached, because it seems to me that atheism should be understood as a positive belief system in the 21st century Western world.Yeah, this isn't really relevant to the issue at hand.
Other than believing there are no gods, we heathens have nothing else in common,Well, it is tangentially attached, because it seems to me that atheism should be understood as a positive belief system in the 21st century Western world.
"Atheism" and "theism" are labels applied to belief systems, not belief systems themselves. There are theistic belief systems and atheistic belief systems, but atheism as a whole is no more a belief system than theism as a whole is.Well, it is tangentially attached, because it seems to me that atheism should be understood as a positive belief system in the 21st century Western world.
"Atheism" and "theism" are labels applied to belief systems, not belief systems themselves. There are theistic belief systems and atheistic belief systems, but atheism as a whole is no more a belief system than theism as a whole is.
Other than believing there are no gods, we heathens have nothing else in common,
except perhaps a greater tendency to accept scientific consensus in areas such as
evolution, geology, cosmology & biology.
I know all of this and do not disagree with it. What I meant is that in the Western 21st century it seems that "atheism" has generally become a word meaning "metaphysical naturalism". While metaphysical naturalists can be humanist or anti-humanist — as Roman Catholics can be humanist or anti-humanist — there is a philosophical unity regarding the nature of reality. In other words, those who identify as "atheist" appear to be of a similar cloth. It is very rare to find a self-identified atheist who believes in a non-theistic transcendentalism such as we find in the pre-Socratic literature."Atheism" and "theism" are labels applied to belief systems, not belief systems themselves. There are theistic belief systems and atheistic belief systems, but atheism as a whole is no more a belief system than theism as a whole is.
Just as a polytheistic Pagan's beliefs or actions don't have a whole lot to do with your faith as a Christian, it's incorrect to assume that someone as antithetical to freethought and humanism as Stalin has anything to do with the beliefs of a modern freethinker and humanist just because neither of them believed in gods.
Yet your arguments imply that you do.I know all of this and do not disagree with it.
By who? I've seen no shortage of atheist skeptic naturalists who recognize that everyone from non-theistic Buddhists to Raelians are atheists too.What I meant is that in the Western 21st century it seems that "atheism" has generally become a word meaning "metaphysical naturalism".
While metaphysical naturalists can be humanist or anti-humanist as Roman Catholics can be humanist or anti-humanist there is a philosophical unity regarding the nature of reality. In other words, those who identify as "atheist" appear to be of a similar cloth. It is very rare to find a self-identified atheist who believes in a non-theistic transcendentalism such as we find in the pre-Socratic literature.
Darkness said:It is very rare to find a self-identified atheist who believes in a non-theistic transcendentalism such as we find in the pre-Socratic literature.
Blatantly ignoring my point, but all right then.I notice that it's very rare to find a Catholic who's a competitive biathlete. What should we infer from this? Is this evidence that there's a "unity" amongst the Church faithful that the co-mingling of skiing and shooting is something to be avoided?
I imagine that these are far and few in between. Buddhists may be non-theistic, but they generally identify as Buddhists, not by the label "atheist".Some Hindus, some Taoists, most Buddhists, Jains, some Quakers, and various others possibly in New Age and the Occult.
I'm not ignoring my point; I'm calling attention that it's wrong-headed. If something is rare in general (e.g. "belief in a non-theistic transcendentalism such as we find in the pre-Socratic literature"), then odds are that it will also be rare among atheists... or theists... or football fans... or plumbers.Blatantly ignoring my point, but all right then.
Ok, but what effect does that have, one way or another, on the case the OP mentions, or the double standard exposed therein?Well, it is tangentially attached, because it seems to me that atheism should be understood as a positive belief system in the 21st century Western world.
I am not quite sure it is that rare. Daoists commonly believe in a non-theistic transcendentalism.I'm not ignoring my point; I'm calling attention that it's wrong-headed. If something is rare in general (e.g. "belief in a non-theistic transcendentalism such as we find in the pre-Socratic literature"), then odds are that it will also be rare among atheists... or theists... or football fans... or plumbers.
The fact that a generally rare thing is also rare among some subset of humanity doesn't mean that this subset is trying to exclude people.
I think that if atheists want representation, they have to position themselves as a positive belief system rather than absolute negation.Ok, but what effect does that have, one way or another, on the case the OP mentions, or the double standard exposed therein?
I think that if atheists want representation, they have to position themselves as a positive belief system rather than absolute negation.
I am not quite sure it is that rare. Daoists commonly believe in a non-theistic transcendentalism.
I think that if atheists want representation, they have to position themselves as a positive belief system rather than absolute negation.
One positive belief system we could all share is the fight against discriminationI think that if atheists want representation, they have to position themselves as a positive belief system rather than absolute negation.
Aren't Taoists rare (in this part of the world, anyhow)? I've only ever met a handful of them in person myself.I am not quite sure it is that rare. Daoists commonly believe in a non-theistic transcendentalism.
Ok, but why? And do all atheists need to do this? Many atheists, including myself, not only accept that our atheism is a positive, cognitive, intellectual position, but take issue with construing atheism as mere absence of theistic belief. But again, how we construe the nature of our position does not seem to have any connection to whether we can enjoy the same sorts of things that theists routinely do, like the case the OP mentions.I think that if atheists want representation, they have to position themselves as a positive belief system rather than absolute negation.
Here in my area, they are made the city remove a war memorial that has been up for many, many years because it is in the shape of a cross. If it isn't considered discrimination in that case, then this can't be called discrimination, either. You can't have it both ways.
Without knowing the specifics, the immediate difference I can see between the cases is you don't state if other memorials were allowed to stay up, after the cross was taken down.
IF other religious monuments were allowed, but the cross was removed for religious objections, then yes.. I agree that it was handled incorrectly.
..if not, there's an obvious difference between the two cases.... and I don't see how you can state this is "having it both ways."