Atheist Re-Activism

[Heyo]

This is, of course, a reaction to the thread Typical atheists vs. Online atheists

Thesis: There is no such thing as atheist activism or proselytisation.

Some religious people find some atheists to be "loud", too loud.

I don't understand that. When I look around on YouTube or RF I see almost no atheist activism. What I see is re-activism. The typical video by "loud" atheists is a reaction video to a theists video. Pro-active atheist propaganda is hard to find if not non existent.

And how could it. Atheism has no message on its own. Atheism is always a reaction to theism. If there were no theists, there wouldn't be atheists.

So, what theists are really condemning is atheists talking back.

Thoughts? Refutations?

 

[We Never Know]

This is, of course, a reaction to the thread Typical atheists vs. Online atheists

Thesis: There is no such thing as atheist activism or proselytisation.

Some religious people find some atheists to be "loud", too loud.

I don't understand that. When I look around on YouTube or RF I see almost no atheist activism. What I see is re-activism. The typical video by "loud" atheists is a reaction video to a theists video. Pro-active atheist propaganda is hard to find if not non existent.

And how could it. Atheism has no message on its own. Atheism is always a reaction to theism. If there were no theists, there wouldn't be atheists.

So, what theists are really condemning is atheists talking back.

Thoughts? Refutations?

IMO this is like the race issue. They are only issues because everyone keeps talking about them and keeps them an issue. If people focused more on their own life, their own happiness, their own problems.. everything would be much better.

 

[Heyo]

IMO this is like the race issue. They are only issues because everyone keeps talking about them and keeps them an issue. If people focused more on their own life, their own happiness, their own problems.. everything would be much better.

Yes, it is somewhat like the race issue. When you ignore that there is something wrong, you can live in blissful oblivion.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

This is, of course, a reaction to the thread Typical atheists vs. Online atheists

Thesis: There is no such thing as atheist activism or proselytisation.

Some religious people find some atheists to be "loud", too loud.

I don't understand that. When I look around on YouTube or RF I see almost no atheist activism. What I see is re-activism. The typical video by "loud" atheists is a reaction video to a theists video. Pro-active atheist propaganda is hard to find if not non existent.

And how could it. Atheism has no message on its own. Atheism is always a reaction to theism. If there were no theists, there wouldn't be atheists.

So, what theists are really condemning is atheists talking back.

Thoughts? Refutations?

Okay, try this. The only thing atheists as atheists have in common is that they are atheists. But as humans they are more than just atheists.
The "problem" is not that they are atheists. It is always about the rest of their worldviews.

So here is what some of us understand. It is not about that they are atheists. It is about what they individually claim the world is and what we ought to do.
A simple example.
Atheist: Some using theism.
Me: Okay, I can do that even as religious. Then what? What follows next? What is the world and what do we ought to do?

It is not that they are atheists. It is for the rest of their individual and group worldviews, that the fun starts.

 

[Altfish]

IMO this is like the race issue. They are only issues because everyone keeps talking about them and keeps them an issue. If people focused more on their own life, their own happiness, their own problems.. everything would be much better.

Indeed, you correctly identify the problems; it is the case that the privileged (ie Whites and Christians) object to their 'rights' being chipped away at.
But you solution is not right. Silence is NOT an option

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Indeed, you correctly identify the problems; it is the case that the privileged (ie Whites and Christians) object to their 'rights' being chipped away at.
But you solution is not right. Silence is NOT an option

Well, it is always about privilege. The last one left in the Western cultural discourse, is the privilege of the normal people versus the neuro diverse.
So it is just a variant of that for the White and Christians.

 

[Nimos]

This is, of course, a reaction to the thread Typical atheists vs. Online atheists

Thesis: There is no such thing as atheist activism or proselytisation.

Some religious people find some atheists to be "loud", too loud.

I don't understand that. When I look around on YouTube or RF I see almost no atheist activism. What I see is re-activism. The typical video by "loud" atheists is a reaction video to a theists video. Pro-active atheist propaganda is hard to find if not non existent.

And how could it. Atheism has no message on its own. Atheism is always a reaction to theism. If there were no theists, there wouldn't be atheists.

So, what theists are really condemning is atheists talking back.

Thoughts? Refutations?

I think you are right at least when it comes to a general view.

I don't think atheism offers or has the purpose of offering what religion can give people, which in many cases is hope, unity, comfort etc. if we only look at the good sides of religion. Also, atheism doesn't claim to supply you with the truth, it is a negative position, in that case, meaning that it is simply the non-acceptance of claims due to lack of evidence.

But when that is said I think atheism is far from being a meaningless position, because a majority of atheists are supporters of humanism as a result of their lack of belief. You can find atheists that are racists or have other awful views of life. But atheism as a view or position does not support or encourage hate towards certain groups of people, like having scriptures or guidelines telling you that to be a "real/good" atheist you have to behave in this and that way.

And I do think that atheists speaking up against religious claims and rules, gives a lot of people hope especially those caught in countries where doing so could lead to death or a long time in prison, but at least them being able to see or hear other atheists around the world challenge these religious ideas, is probably better than nothing. Because there is no doubt that atheism is affecting societies, many western countries are far less religious than they used to be, which is in huge part due to atheists having fought and keep fighting for it for a long time.

And I do think that atheism as a view encourages humanism because when there is no higher power to set the rules, there is not anywhere else to turn for us to look for the right answer to moral issues etc. Atheists having to debate the right to abortion, for instance, would be very different from having such a debate with a religious person.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I think you are right at least when it comes to a general view.

I don't think atheism offers or has the purpose of offering what religion can give people, which in many cases is hope, unity, comfort etc. if we only look at the good sides of religion. Also, atheism doesn't claim to supply you with the truth, it is a negative position, in that case, meaning that it is simply the non-acceptance of claims due to lack of evidence.

But when that is said I think atheism is far from being a meaningless position, because a majority of atheists are supporters of humanism as a result of their lack of belief. You can find atheists that are racists or have other awful views of life. But atheism as a view or position does not support or encourage hate towards certain groups of people, like having scriptures or guidelines telling you that to be a "real/good" atheist you have to behave in this and that way.

And I do think that atheists speaking up against religious claims and rules, gives a lot of people hope especially those caught in countries where doing so could lead to death or a long time in prison, but at least them being able to see or hear other atheists around the world challenge these religious ideas, is probably better than nothing. Because there is no doubt that atheism is affecting societies, many western countries are far less religious than they used to be, which is in huge part due to atheists having fought and keep fighting for it for a long time.

And I do think that atheism as a view encourages humanism because when there is no higher power to set the rules, there is not anywhere else to turn for us to look for the right answer to moral issues etc. Atheists having to debate the right to abortion, for instance, would be very different from having such a debate with a religious person.

Yes, but in practice there are more than one version of humanism, if you look closer.

So you are a humanist and so am I. The joke is we don't do the same version. There is no universal, objective totally same and the only true version of humanism.
Remove religion as you understand it and we would still argue over the world is and what we ought to do..

 

[Nimos]

Yes, but in practice there are more than one version of humanism, if you look closer.

So you are a humanist and so am I. The joke is we don't do the same version. There is no universal, objective totally same and the only true version of humanism.
Remove religion as you understand it and we would still argue over the world is and what we ought to do..

I agree, people will always argue.

But even if we disagree about certain things, the mere fact that none of us would throw in a triumph card like God makes a huge difference.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I agree, people will always argue.

But even if we disagree about certain things, the mere fact that none of us would throw in a triumph card like God makes a huge difference.

No, the idea of Truth is not only possible with God. You still will end up in debates about how truth/proof/evidence works and what the limits are.

 

[Nimos]

No, the idea of Truth is not only possible with God. You still will end up in debates about how truth/proof/evidence works and what the limits are.

I'm not talking about truth, but opinions.

If we were to discuss whether abortion was a good idea or not. And assuming we disagreed, I might present my arguments for why it is good and to that, you would argue that you were against it because that is how you interpret what the Bible say. Then it is no longer you presenting an argument but rather you just following a set of rules given by the bible.

Atheists having such a discussion, would not be able to do this but are forced to make an actual argument. And the chance that they will be forced to think about the human aspect of this is very high.

Having the ability to say that the reason you should do something is that this book or that God says so, is to not take responsibility for it, but to simply hide behind it.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm not talking about truth, but opinions.

If we were to discuss whether abortion was a good idea or not. And assuming we disagreed, I might present my arguments for why it is good and to that, you would argue that you were against it because that is how you interpret what the Bible say. Then it is no longer you presenting an argument but rather you just following a set of rules given by the bible.

Atheists having such a discussion, would not be able to do this but are forced to make an actual argument. And the chance that they will be forced to think about the human aspect of this is very high.

Having the ability to say that the reason you should do something is that this book or that God says so, is to not take responsibility for it, but to simply hide behind it.

I am religious, but not a theist.
So that one doesn't work in my case.
That fun starts with in general the idea of a good, healthy and productive life. And for that you have non-religious people, who claim truth/proof/evidence and claim it is not about opinions.

 

[PureX]

Atheism is literally nothing but reactionism. It's the literal meaning of the "A" in the word. Just ask any atheist and they will tell you ad nauseam how they have no god beliefs. All the while proclaiming that gods don't exist unless and until proven to exist, to the atheist, by his own criteria.

He is literally all reaction and no content.

 

[Kenny]

This is, of course, a reaction to the thread Typical atheists vs. Online atheists

Thesis: There is no such thing as atheist activism or proselytisation.

Some religious people find some atheists to be "loud", too loud.

I don't understand that. When I look around on YouTube or RF I see almost no atheist activism. What I see is re-activism. The typical video by "loud" atheists is a reaction video to a theists video. Pro-active atheist propaganda is hard to find if not non existent.

And how could it. Atheism has no message on its own. Atheism is always a reaction to theism. If there were no theists, there wouldn't be atheists.

So, what theists are really condemning is atheists talking back.

Thoughts? Refutations?

I usually find atheists generally attacking theists more than theist attacking atheists.

You brought up a thought that I had a couple of days age. Why is it that theists "proselytize" but atheists don't?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Atheism is literally nothing but a reactionism. It's the literal meaning of the "A" in the word. Just ask any atheist and they will tell you ad nauseam how they have no god beliefs. All the while proclaiming that gods don't exist unless and until proven to exist, to the atheist, by his own criteria.

He is literally all reaction and no content.

The problem I have is this.
Someone: I am an atheist.
Me: Yes, but you are more than that in the most of your posts, because you make positive claims about what the world is and what we ought to do about.
Someone: But I am an atheist. So that is all that matters.

 

[Heyo]

Okay, try this. The only thing atheists as atheists have in common is that they are atheists. But as humans they are more than just atheists.
The "problem" is not that they are atheists. It is always about the rest of their worldviews.

So here is what some of us understand. It is not about that they are atheists. It is about what they individually claim the world is and what we ought to do.
A simple example.
Atheist: Some using theism.
Me: Okay, I can do that even as religious. Then what? What follows next? What is the world and what do we ought to do?

It is not that they are atheists. It is for the rest of their individual and group worldviews, that the fun starts.

So, when people complain that atheists are too loud, they really mean that humanists are too loud?

 

[PureX]

The problem I have is this.
Someone: I am an atheist.
Me: Yes, but you are more than that in the most of your posts, because you make positive claims about what the world is and what we ought to do about.
Someone: But I am an atheist. So that is all that matters.

Identity is very important to people these days. What tribe they see themselves being in.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I usually find atheists generally attacking theists more than theist attacking atheists.

You brought up a thought that I had a couple of days age. Why is it that theists "proselytize" but atheists don't?

I don't know that. I know that in the jargon of "militant", you can find both kinds on both sides of religion and non-religion.

I know you try, but you still have some "dogma" due to your actual culture, that is in a sense unrelated to religion as such. But so do I.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So, when people complain that atheists are too loud, they really mean that humanists are too loud?

No, not in all cases. In some yes, but not all.

If you look closer it is in the details of the idea of a good, healthy and productive life, that there are variants of how to do humanism in practice.

 

[Heyo]

I usually find atheists generally attacking theists more than theist attacking atheists.

You brought up a thought that I had a couple of days age. Why is it that theists "proselytize" but atheists don't?

Both is because atheists have no message but theists do. And some think that their message is so important that they want to spread it, e.g. on YouTube.
And some of those messages are so horrendous or so wrong that people speak out against them. And while it would be the duty of the theists to keep their house clean, it is almost always atheists who jump to that task.