We often hear it said that atheism is itself a religion. This past weekend, T mentioned that he had a friend, whose response to this claim is that "Atheism is a religion in the same way that non stamp collecting is a hobby." In the moment, this seemed a very witty and rather penetrating response, but on further reflection I must say I have my doubts about whether this analogy makes any sense - so I thought I'd throw this out here to see if anyone has any thoughts to share on this.
The key, in my mind, is understanding that stamp collecting (like both religion and atheism) is a position of association, while non stamp collecting is a position of non-association, indicating a vacuum that has not been filled. Religious and atheistic claims are both clear stances on the question of what reality is. And so when it is claimed that atheism is a religion, what people really mean is that atheism makes a truth claim about the world in much the same way that any religious philosophy does - it claims that there is no God or spiritual existence beyond the material domain. It then goes on to judge anyone who believes in a God as false. By adopting this stance, atheism ceases to be just a position of non-association, and becomes one of clear association with a creed. One can also see in today's world that fanatical atheists are quite similar to fanatical religionists in the way they think and act, exhorting people to follow their philosophy and not the other's and freely judging the other side as being morally bankrupt, harmful to society and hindering its progress. From these perspectives, if religious beliefs are likened to stamp collecting, atheism should maybe be likened to something like coin collecting.
If I had to make an analogy at all with hobbies, I think agnosticism (and not atheism) would be the true analogue to non stamp collecting, as it clearly takes no stance on the matter - just as non stamp collecting is not a hobby.
Thoughts? :)
God Hates Figs
-
A blog I encountered argued that God hates certain groups of people, and
that therefore believers in God—specifically, Christians—should also hate
them. Bi...
3 years ago
Posts
8 comments:
While you're right about there being 'fanatical atheists', there's a flaw in your view of atheism. You wrongly peg atheism as a truth claim. Atheism is not a claim that there is 'no god'. In fact most of the scientific community, notable non-believers, sceptics and the like would simply say 'there is no evidence to suggest or support the existence of a god'. You'll find that most of them will freely accept the idea that should evidence be presented that would support the existence of a god, they would (if somewhat begrudgingly in most cases) accept it.
Also, I want to point out that one thing atheism as a movement does share with religious is a fringe of 'believers' who treat it as though it were. People like S.E. Cupp come to mind - the self-described "atheist" pundit who opens her mouth for 5 minutes before you realize she as atheist as Dawkins is superstitious - that is to say - not at all. Any movement is bound to be passionately misrepresented by people who believe the right thing for the wrong reasons.
eyesno - I think the problem is maybe that we are defining atheism in different ways. Your definition of atheism seems to align more with my definition of agnosticism. In most cases, in my interactions with self-proclaimed atheists, they have tended to fall into the former category of people who believe firmly in the non-existence of God.
You are right in that atheism is a position of clear association - that of believing that there is No God. However, I have a slight disconnect in labeling it a religion. The disconnect comes from how one defines religion. Is religion simply any set of moral codes and world view (including a truth claim) that a group of people chose to espouse? If so how is it different from any non religious philosophy (say collectivism or capitalism)? To me religion by definition is a view on spirituality and presupposes a belief in God or a spiritual reality beyond material existence. Which is why I'd not label atheism as a religion but perhaps as the anti-thesis of religion.
Nithya - what you say is true, in that defining religion is important. The way you've defined it, atheism wouldn't be a "religion". I guess the only point I was trying to make was that atheists often see themselves as non-conformists, while in reality they are usually very much attached to a particular world view and belief in the nature of reality. And so it was only this aspect of "religion" that I was ascribing to them - and I think this is what most people who call atheism a religion ascribe to them as well. Clearly people who call atheists religious don't mean that atheists believe in some other kind of God - all they mean is that it is as strong a world-view and belief as is believing in God.
Anyway, all this was just a comment on a metaphor - so no point stretching that metaphor and trying to read too much into it :)
Thought-provoking post, Nikhil.
I, similarly, view atheism as a clear believe in there being no God, while I view agnosticism as more similar to what eyesno was describing of many in the scientific community in particular who say there's no clear evidence of the existence (and I'd the non-existence) of God. That is to say, we can't say one way or the other.
I also tend to agree with Nithya about associating the definition of religion with some a belief in "God", though I see your point, Nikhil, that atheists can be just as attached to a particular point of view about reality as many religious people.
Interesting post Nikhil. In my mind though, there is a difference between religion and theism too. Belief in the presence or absence of God in and of itself does not constitute a religion.
In fact, religion defines a goal ( to have a better afterlife or next life, as the case may be) and prescribes a method to get there. For many religions it is the belief in one deity, or living your life according to a moral code laid out in one or several holy books.
There are those that believe stamp collecting can be a hobby and those that believe that it can't be a hobby (perhaps). However even among the believers there are those that choose not to pursue stamp collecting for themselves - which would mean theist but not religious. Thoughts?
I suppose I might be more direct:
what is religion? religion comes from latin "religio"
re (just like in english)
ligio (to bind)
Atheism, as a general belief or subsection of society, in many many ways fulfills this description.
Religion itself, as a word, as a descriptor, does not rely on "God" to exist. It can just as easily be a belief in the absense of God.
Post a Comment