• 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!

Different ways of being human?

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Eh, this is oversimplifying a tad. Atheism is always a reaction against the surrounding cultural environment, specifically the prevailing theologies. Because of how religion in the West became dominated by institutional religion, atheism in the West is also a reaction against institutionalized religion. Part of that reaction involves formulation of one's own creeds, ideas, and institutions... which at the end of the day is pretty analogous in form and function to those you find in theistic religions.

I or no one i know is reacting, i simply do not believe in gods, end of my atheist story.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
Eh, this is oversimplifying a tad. Atheism is always a reaction against the surrounding cultural environment, specifically the prevailing theologies. Because of how religion in the West became dominated by institutional religion, atheism in the West is also a reaction against institutionalized religion. Part of that reaction involves formulation of one's own creeds, ideas, and institutions... which at the end of the day is pretty analogous in form and function to those you find in theistic religions.
But there isn’t a single creed, idea, or institution for atheists to follow. Anyone is an atheist if they don’t believe in God. An atheist can be a secular humanist, a nihilist, an objectivist, a laveyan satanist, or a dog or a newborn baby. One could be an atheist and adhere to Christian principles.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Biologically, of course, but not behaviourially

Behaviour does not define human

For being free-thinkers!

In the USSR, usually, for gathering on groups of more than 6 people, the same as why christians etc were imprisoned.

Then there would be no such things as "atheists" it wouldn't exist as a category of humans, clearly it is, if you can speak of "atheists", if you use that actual word and concept

Eh?

Seems very much like a religion to me

You are entitled to your opinion. However using the definition of atheism and the definition of religion they are complete opposite.

Then how come on RF some atheists fill in their "religion" as "atheist"?????

Because there is no option, no atheists tick here. Of course we can always leave it blank and then maybe certain people will not jump to invalid conclusions
 

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
There are different ways of behaving, for different kinds of human

And there are different kinds of human even though there is a shared humanity

Human is a species, not a behavioural trait


There are different ways of behaving, for different kinds of human


And there are different kinds of human even though there is a shared humanity

See above

As regards content, yes

Sociologically Atheism functions as a tribe

Wow, really? I don't think so, there is nothing except disbelief in gods that binds atheists together.


So, there's a "we"?????

Sounds tribal to me :D

It would, good for your confirmation bias
 

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
Human is a species, not a behavioural trait
Yes and different populations behave differently - according to culture

there is nothing except disbelief in gods that binds atheists togethe
Which is a pretty big and important thing which marks atheists as being separate from others, which makes them a distinct social group as they differ from the mainstream...

Even if atheists didn't self identify as a group they are still a social group as they differ from the historic norm

It would, good for your confirmation bias
You used the word "we" to refer to all the RF Atheists, I'm sorry but that is inescapably tribal
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
Diffrent religions are simply different ways of being human.

Discuss.
I think there is some truth in this. Each religious tradition seems to capture something of what it is to relate to the world as a human. A religion is an expression of the world looking at itself through a human lens - if you'll excuse my attempt at being a little bit poetic.

There are lots of ways to be a human that don't involve religion. Or at least not in the way it is normally conceived.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Atheism has been used to do that

Look at Stalinist USSR or China

Atheism has been used to hold together totalitarian societies

No, the regimes you mentioned were personality cults. Those leaders were setting themselves up as demi-gods, in many ways, quite religious.

And I would argue that Atheism is tribal, that it constitutes a tribe

It functions just like any religion

I don't think atheists are a tribe. But I would agree that secular humanists are a tribe. I think an easy way to think of this is that members of a tribe believe in some of the same things. Atheists are those who do NOT believe in god(s), that's the opposite of believing in a thing.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Aren't humans inherently tribal, by nature???
No, far too simplistic. Humans are a eusocial species, with the special (and contradictory) capacity to default from eusociality for entirely individual purposes. Our eusocialiaty may lead towards some tribalistic behaviours, but our individuality permits us to look for opportunities that arise from betraying our tribe for our personal gain.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
I or no one i know is reacting, i simply do not believe in gods, end of my atheist story.

Let me use a different word then - it's countercultural. Do you disagree that atheism is countercultural (that is, a reaction against the mainstream culture)? Given human cultures throughout history have been utterly dominated by non-atheists I'm not sure how atheism can be anything other than counterculture. It's not like counterculture or being a reaction against dominant culture is bad, if that's where your brain was going. I myself am part of a countercultural religious demographic.


But there isn’t a single creed, idea, or institution for atheists to follow. Anyone is an atheist if they don’t believe in God. An atheist can be a secular humanist, a nihilist, an objectivist, a laveyan satanist, or a dog or a newborn baby. One could be an atheist and adhere to Christian principles.

I don't process how any of this is a problem in understanding that atheism, in some cases, ends up looking very analogous in form and function to religion in a person's life. Labels don't much matter to me, though. I look at what an idea is doing in people's lives - how it shapes their identities, their practices, their sense of community. If the (a)theism question is really unimportant to someone's life, would a term like apathiest make more sense? Bah, labels. Superficialities that oversimplify the substance of people's lives. So annoying sometimes.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
Let me use a different word then - it's countercultural. Do you disagree that atheism is countercultural (that is, a reaction against the mainstream culture)? Given human cultures throughout history have been utterly dominated by non-atheists I'm not sure how atheism can be anything other than counterculture. It's not like counterculture or being a reaction against dominant culture is bad, if that's where your brain was going. I myself am part of a countercultural religious demographic.



I don't process how any of this is a problem in understanding that atheism, in some cases, ends up looking very analogous in form and function to religion in a person's life. Labels don't much matter to me, though. I look at what an idea is doing in people's lives - how it shapes their identities, their practices, their sense of community. If the (a)theism question is really unimportant to someone's life, would a term like apathiest make more sense? Bah, labels. Superficialities that oversimplify the substance of people's lives. So annoying sometimes.
I always did think that “apatheist” was a useless label. “Apolitical” is useful because politics is a pop topic. Someone without concern for theology, however, would likely just flat out ignore the questions.

Atheist is a useful label to denote that one doesn’t believe in the existence of God. I’m only saying that it isn’t a religion.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Let me use a different word then - it's countercultural. Do you disagree that atheism is countercultural (that is, a reaction against the mainstream culture)? Given human cultures throughout history have been utterly dominated by non-atheists I'm not sure how atheism can be anything other than counterculture. It's not like counterculture or being a reaction against dominant culture is bad, if that's where your brain was going. I myself am part of a countercultural religious demographic.

I would say that New Atheism specifically arose as counter fundamentalism.

I don't process how any of this is a problem in understanding that atheism, in some cases, ends up looking very analogous in form and function to religion in a person's life. Labels don't much matter to me, though. I look at what an idea is doing in people's lives - how it shapes their identities, their practices, their sense of community. If the (a)theism question is really unimportant to someone's life, would a term like apathiest make more sense? Bah, labels. Superficialities that oversimplify the substance of people's lives. So annoying sometimes.

I see atheism taking the shape somewhat similar to a religion on a very small number of cases. More specifically when people feel united because of their atheism and derive rituals and gatherings because of it. This is not really applicable to most atheists though.

I think though that New Atheism would come closer to an ideology. A way of thinking that doesn't concern itself merely with gods, but that also involves valuing science and skepticism over folk knowledge.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Diffrent religions are simply different ways of being human.

Discuss.

Different religions are different people pretending they have any knowledge about God.

Pretending to have knowledge about something which you don't?
I guess that is pretty human.
So no, it is not really humans being any different from what they are.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Diffrent religions are simply different ways of being human.

Discuss.
Just as much as being a member of a particular country might be too (with appropriate language probably), or in having any particular political affiliation, or in having any specific moral beliefs or lack of such, amongst other things, and the mix of these might be more important than any one standing out as being 'ways of being human'. And, like so many of these factors, religion is often just another way to separate peoples when it might become the defining characteristic - one example being Islam in certain countries. :oops:
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Let me use a different word then - it's countercultural. Do you disagree that atheism is countercultural (that is, a reaction against the mainstream culture)?

Yes i disagree. An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in gods
There is a lot more to culture than god belief.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes i disagree. An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in gods
There is a lot more to culture than god belief.

There's also a lot more to culture than the status of women, but that doesn't mean feminism wasn't countercultural for it's day. I don't understand your perspective here, but if you wish to ascribe far less cultural significance to atheism than I do, I suppose that's your right.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
There's also a lot more to culture than the status of women, but that doesn't mean feminism wasn't countercultural for it's day. I don't understand your perspective here, but if you wish to ascribe far less cultural significance to atheism than I do, I suppose that's your right.

Most atheists ascribe no meaning to atheism and get something of a chuckle out of it when others brand them with their own beliefs about atheism.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Most atheists ascribe no meaning to atheism and get something of a chuckle out of it when others brand them with their own beliefs about atheism.

I get the sense you're missing my point here and I'm not sure how to resolve that. I'm not talking about "ascribing meaning to atheism" I'm talking about recognizing the impact of atheism as a cultural subgroup on human culture and history. And for atheism that impact is hugely disproportionate to the demographics, so to be so dismissive of all that is, frankly, bizarre. But if you'd rather I believe the idea of atheism contributes nothing and zilch to human culture and history, I mean... okay? o_O
 
Top