Atheists questioning their Atheism?

[Orias]

Since I have always been open to evidence one way or another, I am not sure what it is that I am to question about my not having a belief in any god......

If one were truly open to "evidence" then their own comfort would definitly be in question.

I'd go as far to say that most atheists just plain downright don't care.

Evidence is assumable, just as scientific theory is. Give and take a few select intelligences.

If one were to truly question their belief then it should be evident that the specified belief is not for them.

 

[laffy_taffy]

I would disagree w/ you there. The foundation of Marxism is class warfare, without it there is no Marxism.

The catchy slogan that Marx used in the critique of the Gotha Program was used to summarize life in an ideal communist society - a society where there is no labor anymore.

But in order to get to that society Marx was very blunt about his distaste and distrust of the church. The only people Marx trusted w/ the revolution were the workers, everyone else, remember, was a "class enemy," especially the church, whom he saw as merchants of a false ideology and a kind of slavery. Stalin and Mao took their ques from Lenin, who went on an open rampage against religion.

Atheism wasn't peripheral for Marxist-Leninists, it was central to their ideology and worldview. They saw themselves as atheists and saw it their duty to indoctrinate the world in their worldview; the systematic destruction of church's and clergy was not a peripheral act that they could have done without, but religion threatened the foundations of Marxism, and it was a dedicated systematic eradication in the USSR, just as in China, North Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba.

This is why the official belief of the state was proclaimed atheism.

Don't want to start a long debate here, but I do want people to remember what happened there, and the millions of Christians persecuted.

And yes, I guess you were talking about communism w/ a small c. Saying Jesus was a communist is a pretty big leap.

Atheism is not a worldview. What you are describing is anti-theism, not atheism. You cannot even teach a lack of belief. Sure, a country can try to declare themselves an "atheist" nation, but does someone else's assertions actually force you to change your beliefs? Can they get into your brain and force you to no longer believe in god just because they may be trying to teach anti-theism?

 

[asketikos]

Atheism is not a worldview. What you are describing is anti-theism, not atheism. You cannot even teach a lack of belief. Sure, a country can try to declare themselves an "atheist" nation, but does someone else's assertions actually force you to change your beliefs? Can they get into your brain and force you to no longer believe in god just because they may be trying to teach anti-theism?

Sure - people can be brainwashed into believing all sorts of things. Collective brianwashing is a historical occurance, as evidance by movements such as slavery and anti-semitism, the great terror, and the cultural revolution -- these are all indoctrinated worldviews.

Militant atheism, as proposed by Marxism-Leninism, is indeed a worldview.

To lack a belief in god posits that you know of such a belief but choose not to engage in it, not to believe in a deity - rather than just not being aware of it at all, because there is no choice in that option; I think we all agree that atheists on this forum are fully aware of theistic concepts, but chose not to believe in them, thus they have a worldview different from theists, one in which there is no God.

 

[Orias]

Atheism is not a worldview. What you are describing is anti-theism, not atheism. You cannot even teach a lack of belief. Sure, a country can try to declare themselves an "atheist" nation, but does someone else's assertions actually force you to change your beliefs? Can they get into your brain and force you to no longer believe in god just because they may be trying to teach anti-theism?

To the contrary, atheism is anti-theism, hence the "a" before theism.

Many atheists alike claim a stance of "neutral skecpticsm", but we all know if that were true they wouldn't be debating and telling theists alike that their logic is ill-informed.

You can teach lack of belief, it's called public schooling, education. It is not necessarily a lack of belief, it is just the belief of nonbelief.

I have yet to meet an atheist with an ounce of understanding faith.

 

[Nooj]

Millions of Muslim's weren't killed because they were Muslim in the Soviet Union.

When were millions of Christians killed because they were Christians? Please show evidence (if you're quoting from Wikipedia, please link directly to it). You used the word persecuted, and I agree with that since religion was actively discouraged. I don't know about millions of martyrs.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But how can communism not be anti-religious? The whole foundation of Marxism rests on the denouncing of religion as a creation myth used to suppress and oppress people.

But perhaps you're speaking of some other communism?

Many religious communities are communist in their approach to governance and property: the Hutterites, the Amish, etc.

 

[EverChanging]

I think we all agree that atheists on this forum are fully aware of theistic concepts, but chose not to believe in them, thus they have a worldview different from theists, one in which there is no God.

I have a problem with the assertion that atheists choose not to believe in theistic concepts of deity. I don't believe in theistic deities, and I couldn't even if I wanted to. I see no evidence for it, nor do I find it relevant to my spirituality in any way, shape, or form. It is not only something that I am not able to accept intellectually or from my personal studies, but it is really irrelevant to me, though I still consider it from time to time on an intellectual level. But I can't accept that I can just arbitrarily choose to believe or not believe in something. I might want to believe in Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry as a literal place, but I can't choose to do that.

I have yet to meet an atheist with an ounce of understanding faith.

I'm not sure what is meant by this. There are a number of spiritualities that include atheists, such as Buddhism, Taoism, and so forth, not to mention how more liberal and/or mystical branches of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are actually quite incompatible with a strict, literal theism.

 

[laffy_taffy]

To the contrary, atheism is anti-theism, hence the "a" before theism.

fyi: The Greek prefix "a" means "not" or "without."

For example:

Atheism = Without/theism (belief in the existence of god(s)
Apolitical = Without/politics OR Not/political
Asexual = Without/sex(uality) OR Not/sexual

 

[laffy_taffy]

Many atheists alike claim a stance of "neutral skecpticsm", but we all know if that were true they wouldn't be debating and telling theists alike that their logic is ill-informed.

I don't know why so many theists seem to hold the mistaken notion that lacking belief in (the existence of) god should equate to not having an opinion about the claims about god put forth by its followers. Who says I don't/can't have an opinion? Of course I do! I have a lot to say about your (general "you") claims about your god, and may tell you that your claims are not convincing or do not make sense, or whatever. So? Do you think his existence is dependent on the claims that men make about him? Let's assume you're a christian for example: Your god has revealed himself to others and many even claim to have a relationship with him. Who's to say whether or not this could happen to me? I may find your claims to be unconvincing, but if god himself revealed himself to me, I would then at least have some kind of evidence.

Also, even if I totally believed that your particular god did not exist, that would not mean that I believed that all gods did not exist. I actually find it "believable" that there could be an impersonal, creator type deistic god that we cannot perceive and has no interaction with us. I have not yet found any evidence to convince me to believe that such a god does in fact exist, but I cannot claim that such a god does NOT exist. You seem to be under the impression that if atheists have an opinion about your god, or argue with you about your unconvincing claims, that we hold the belief that all gods do not exist. Hate to break it to you, but the majority of the world does not believe in your triune god (again, assuming you're christian). There are plenty of other gods out there besides just yours.[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

 

[laffy_taffy]

Sure - people can be brainwashed into believing all sorts of things. Collective brianwashing is a historical occurance, as evidance by movements such as slavery and anti-semitism, the great terror, and the cultural revolution -- these are all indoctrinated worldviews.

Militant atheism, as proposed by Marxism-Leninism, is indeed a worldview.

To lack a belief in god posits that you know of such a belief but choose not to engage in it, not to believe in a deity - rather than just not being aware of it at all, because there is no choice in that option; I think we all agree that atheists on this forum are fully aware of theistic concepts, but chose not to believe in them, thus they have a worldview different from theists, one in which there is no God.

Well, then that is a belief in addition to atheism. This would be above and beyond the basic definition that applies to ALL atheists which is having no belief in god. Atheism is not a worldview in and of itself. Sure, atheists can adopt worldviews (i.e.,Humanism, Buddhism, etc), create their own, or not adhere to any particular worldview. Would I assume that you believe in reincarnation since you are a theist (and other theists believe in this?). Atheism is just a label to describe those who have no belief in god, just like theism is a word to describe those who do.

 

[LuisDantas]

Marxism is often considered (by sociologists) to be a religion. Part of the reason is its methods, which include oppression of oposition and strong propaganda.

Atheism is something far less spectacular and, frankly, even uninteresting.

 

[asketikos]

Marxism is often considered (by sociologists) to be a religion. Part of the reason is its methods, which include oppression of oposition and strong propaganda.

Atheism is something far less spectacular and, frankly, even uninteresting.

I've heard that used before in my graduate classes, but I think they use it as a metaphor, no real academic would make such an argument, I hope.

 

[asketikos]

Well, then that is a belief in addition to atheism. This would be above and beyond the basic definition that applies to ALL atheists which is having no belief in god. Atheism is not a worldview in and of itself. Sure, atheists can adopt worldviews (i.e.,Humanism, Buddhism, etc), create their own, or not adhere to any particular worldview. Would I assume that you believe in reincarnation since you are a theist (and other theists believe in this?). Atheism is just a label to describe those who have no belief in god, just like theism is a word to describe those who do.

I think I made it clear that it was Marxist-Lenisist atheistic principles that drove them to institute it as an official state belief, and to preach it, and also atheism was one of the principles of Marxism-Leninism.

 

[Luminous]

Of course, they had courses on why god doesn't exist and how religion was the poison of the masses. Marxism preaches atheism, and religion is one of Marx's greatest examples throughout his works of class oppression. Atheism 's a central tenet of Marxism, if it weren't then they wouldn't have murdered thousands of priests and demolished thousands of churches.

interesting courses i wish my school allowed them to be taught along side of allowing churches and priests to attempt to have their way as well.
of course the noble courses of agnosticism would show both to be baseless.
religion is the poison of masses as much as any other anti-agnostic idea.

 

[St Giordano Bruno]

I would only question state atheism. That is the atheism of Stalin or other authortarian dictators like Mao Tse-tung stifling any freedom of thought. I think atheism is an individual right of free thought and not imposed on us from the state. I don't think the state should be telling us what to think. I am glad those SOB's are dead and the Cold War is over because they were totally counterproductive to the cause of atheism and free thought.

 

[LuisDantas]

I've heard that used before in my graduate classes, but I think they use it as a metaphor, no real academic would make such an argument, I hope.

You hope? I would need a moment to check for sources, but I believe it to be a very serious and solid argument.

What reason or grounds there are to want to doubt it?

 

[LuisDantas]

I think I made it clear that it was Marxist-Lenisist atheistic principles that drove them to institute it as an official state belief, and to preach it, and also atheism was one of the principles of Marxism-Leninism.

You did. But you are placing a lot more emphasis on the atheism then I see fit.

 

[LuisDantas]

I would only question state atheism. That is the atheism of Stalin or other authortarian dictators like Mao Tse-tung stifling any freedom of thought. I think atheism is an individual right of free thought and not imposed on us from the state. I don't think the state should be telling us what to think. I am glad those SOB's are dead and the Cold War is over because they were totally counterproductive to the cause of atheism and free thought.

So true.

 

[Commoner]

Does this ever happen? I notice Atheists like to push Theists to question Theism, or even sometimes accuse Theists of not questioning enough because we didn't arrive at Atheism. Now I ask this. Do Atheists ever question their Atheism?

As said, it's hard to question the absence of a belief. There is literally nothing to "question". Now, when we're presented with an argument for a god, we look at it and decide whether or not it's valid. If that's "questioning", then of course we do it. And if you simply mean "are we ever unsure of whether or not an argument for a god actually makes sense", then - yes, of course. There are a lot of people working very hard to come up with incredibly convoluted logical arguments and it would be silly to claim each can be explained away without giving it some serious thought and finding the fallacies on which they're built. (Un)fortunatelly though, there have been no arguments so far, which did not in one way or another beg the question or made a similar logical mis-step to come to the "god conclusion". If such an argument were presented, I would readily jump on the deists' wagon and await an argument for the validity of a particular theistic belief.

 

[Alceste]

I would disagree w/ you there. The foundation of Marxism is class warfare, without it there is no Marxism.

The catchy slogan that Marx used in the critique of the Gotha Program was used to summarize life in an ideal communist society - a society where there is no labor anymore.

But in order to get to that society Marx was very blunt about his distaste and distrust of the church. The only people Marx trusted w/ the revolution were the workers, everyone else, remember, was a "class enemy," especially the church, whom he saw as merchants of a false ideology and a kind of slavery. Stalin and Mao took their ques from Lenin, who went on an open rampage against religion.

Atheism wasn't peripheral for Marxist-Leninists, it was central to their ideology and worldview. They saw themselves as atheists and saw it their duty to indoctrinate the world in their worldview; the systematic destruction of church's and clergy was not a peripheral act that they could have done without, but religion threatened the foundations of Marxism, and it was a dedicated systematic eradication in the USSR, just as in China, North Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba.

This is why the official belief of the state was proclaimed atheism.

Don't want to start a long debate here, but I do want people to remember what happened there, and the millions of Christians persecuted.

And yes, I guess you were talking about communism w/ a small c. Saying Jesus was a communist is a pretty big leap.

I would say that because you are religious yourself you have a tendency to overestimate the historical significance of religion. Religion is only one of many factors that helps humans distinguish between the groups of "us" and "them" our psychologies seem to have to manufacture in order to do violence to one another.

If you read your bible, you'll see that Jesus and his disciples lived a communal lifestyle. IOW, they did not own private property. Everything they had was held in common. And don't get me started with the bread and fishes! Jesus was a raging communist if ever there was one. If you have failed to pick up on this it is due to the fact you have a distorted view of communism due to over-estimating the significance of religion.