• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Atheism: A bastardized word

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Why people align atheism with science I have no idea? Atheism and theism are philosophical points of view, are they not?

I don't think atheists can be uniformly generalized. Same thing with theists.

An atheist simply asserts that there is no God(s), or that it is very unlikely.

I have no problem with atheists or theists using science to justify their claims, but that isn't science.

Someone who does not know if God exists and sees no evidence for one is an agnostic.

I do see a movement where some people align atheism with science. I don't think scientists, believers and non believers, have any desire to conflate atheism, or theism with science.

Some popularizers of science want to do science the disservice of getting involved with atheist debates against theism. That has to be a big waste of time.

Science can only refute literal interpretations of nature that are told of in scriptures.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
It is the god-given right of every word to contain within itself both denotation and connotation. Railing against the latter is a useless blasphemy.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
You can cry 'scientism' all you want, but it is not a thing. That is why you have to say it in quotes. It is a pejorative term used by those who feel our increased understanding of the cosmos encroaching on their myth systems. :)
It's fascinating that you can be so wrong, and still have no clue that you are wrong. :) It's why I see "scientism" as a cult. And it's in quotes because it's a sham. It's a misuse of the idea of science.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
It's fascinating that you can be so wrong, and still have no clue that you are wrong. :) It's why I see "scientism" as a cult. And it's in quotes because it's a sham. It's a misuse of the idea of science.
OGC.gif
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I don't know if bastardized is a curse word according to RF, but the context is pretty much the same. Why or what is the reasoning of aligning atheism with science and common atheist "opinions about" science?

For the sake of curiosity, long long ago Arabs called Muslims who were sinners or murderers or rapists by the word Almulhidh, which actually means atheist. Now this word is used for atheists.

That was just an occurrence. Anyway, there was a time when atheists were considered unscientific, backward, primitive people. It was the theists who were the flip side.

Everyone has their ego and will grab opportunities to feel good.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
It's a pretty simple term that has been bastardized by one side as a religion and the other has a connection with christian god, rejection, and other add-ons with the OP science. Since atheism is simple, why is it associated with science?
What happened in western culture is the word 'atheism' kind of got married to the philosophy of materialism.

(From Wikipedia) Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist.

Atheism-materialism also gets connected to science because mainstream science only deals with the material universe.

 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
What happened in western culture is the word 'atheism' kind of got married to the philosophy of materialism.

(From Wikipedia) Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist.

Atheism-materialism also gets connected to science because mainstream science only deals with the material universe.


(I've read) but atheism has to do with deities not disbelief in the supernatural and mysticism. So, not all atheist are materialist and the word atheism doesn't suggest materialism.

I don't see the connection (based on my comment)?
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
(I've read) but atheism has to do with deities not disbelief in the supernatural and mysticism. So, not all atheist are materialist and the word atheism doesn't suggest materialism.

I don't see the connection (based on my comment)?
As I said the words atheism and materialism are not the same thing but in western culture the tendency is to marry the two together.

The connection developed because after rejection of deities the question is begged then 'what do you believe'. And for the atheist the answer is most often that we and everything are just the result of material interactions.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Well, atheism doesn't mean "lack of belief in deities" for starters. And the problem here is actually called "scientism". Look it up. It's a new semi-philosophical cultural movement based on pseudo-scientific platitudes and misconceptions intended to elevate atheistic naturalism to the status of some sort of intellectualized 'holy grail'. And as with any would-be cult, the adherents can't see themselves as being in a cult. They think they have simply found the one and only viable pathway to 'the truth' (as all cultists do). It is worrisome for those who can see it for what it is. Mostly because those who can't see it for what it is have already been sucked in, or are in danger of it. And we know from past experience that these "truth cults" never end well.

End of rant. :)

Well, atheism doesn't mean "lack of belief in deities" for starters.

That's exactly what it means. Quit trying to pretend otherwise.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I don't know if bastardized is a curse word according to RF, but the context is pretty much the same. Why or what is the reasoning of aligning atheism with science and common atheist "opinions about" science?

Just because atheists have opinions and attached to science as opposed to theists doesn't change that the word atheism just means lack of belief that deities (Jehovah, Thor, etc) exist.

One of the consequences of adding more things to this word-both of theist and atheist alike-gives the impression that, from a religious view, it is in opposition to religious norms and outlook. In other words, to some theists, atheism challenges the religious view of belief in deities. On the atheist point of view, unless my basic understanding is off, they seem to associate atheism with science, rejection of the christian god, and things of that nature. Both sides (in my opinion) seem to bastardize a word because of their own experiences (say indoctrination) or biases and cognitive dissonance (such as the uncomfortable and defensive response of being challenged that they 'may not' be deities).

Why or what is the reasoning of aligning atheism with science and common atheist "opinions about" science?

In addition, I understand that it is hard to believe no gods exist but I don't understand the need to find outstanding justifications for it. I don't know.

Rant over.

Enjoy.
I know atheists who are pretty much ignorant of science -- I'm only modestly informed myself. And every atheist I know has notions that they hold to be true that they couldn't prove with an army of lawyers -- we all do.

The only thing the word atheist means to me is that I do not believe in the existence (let alone involvement) of deities of any kind. That's it. Nothing else.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Well, atheism doesn't mean "lack of belief in deities" for starters. And the problem here is actually called "scientism". Look it up. It's a new semi-philosophical cultural movement based on pseudo-scientific platitudes and misconceptions intended to elevate atheistic naturalism to the status of some sort of intellectualized 'holy grail'. And as with any would-be cult, the adherents can't see themselves as being in a cult. They think they have simply found the one and only viable pathway to 'the truth' (as all cultists do). It is worrisome for those who can see it for what it is. Mostly because those who can't see it for what it is have already been sucked in, or are in danger of it. And we know from past experience that these "truth cults" never end well.

End of rant. :)


Bulloop

Atheism : disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
From the OED

Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to bastardise the meaning of the word thats is solely down to your bias and bigotry
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
As I said the words atheism and materialism are not the same thing but in western culture the tendency is to marry the two together.

The connection developed because after rejection of deities the question is begged then 'what do you believe'. And for the atheist the answer is most often that we and everything are just the result of material interactions.

This kind of confuses theists (those who care) that atheism is materalistic before some atheists opinions relate it to that and science. I wonder if both parties can step away from that attribution (and assuming opinions define the word) and just go by what the word actually means as a foundation for anything else said.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
This kind of confuses theists (those who care) that atheism is materalistic before some atheists opinions relate it to that and science. I wonder if both parties can step away from that attribution (and assuming opinions define the word) and just go by what the word actually means as a foundation for anything else said.
Materialism is related closely to science in that they both only accept the existence of the material/physical realm.
 

infrabenji

Active Member
I don't know if bastardized is a curse word according to RF, but the context is pretty much the same. Why or what is the reasoning of aligning atheism with science and common atheist "opinions about" science?

Just because atheists have opinions and attached to science as opposed to theists doesn't change that the word atheism just means lack of belief that deities (Jehovah, Thor, etc) exist.

One of the consequences of adding more things to this word-both of theist and atheist alike-gives the impression that, from a religious view, it is in opposition to religious norms and outlook. In other words, to some theists, atheism challenges the religious view of belief in deities. On the atheist point of view, unless my basic understanding is off, they seem to associate atheism with science, rejection of the christian god, and things of that nature. Both sides (in my opinion) seem to bastardize a word because of their own experiences (say indoctrination) or biases and cognitive dissonance (such as the uncomfortable and defensive response of being challenged that they 'may not' be deities).

Why or what is the reasoning of aligning atheism with science and common atheist "opinions about" science?

In addition, I understand that it is hard to believe no gods exist but I don't understand the need to find outstanding justifications for it. I don't know.

Rant over.

Enjoy.
Why science? Let's look at the definition... Science follows a systematic methodology based on evidence. Without evidence is belief warranted? In answer to your question, "What" is that we want our model of reality to match actual reality as closely as possible. Our thoughts inform our beliefs and our beliefs inform our actions and our actions have consequences either good and/or bad for ourselves and/or others. "Why" and "What" are essentially the same question. In the absence of testability a person may make an unfalsifiable claim but many prefer an intellectually honest answer which again, in the complete absence of evidence, is "I don't know". Science is not static. It is a methodology. Logic and science are intertwined methodologies.
What is the relationship between logic and science? Logic is applicable to science, because in a very real sense the objects of logic are the objects of science, not so much owing to the universality of the predicables, but owing to the common essence in itself considered by both logic and science. So let me ask you this, Is it logical to believe in a god or gods without first meeting the burden of proof. We're not looking for justifications to not believe. Unfortunately, given all we have found out about our reality so far using these methodologies there is currently no evidence for the existence of a god or gods.
 
Top