Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
What do we make of this? What will come of it? Your thoughts?
-
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!
The West is becoming increasingly Atheist and Agnostic
- Thread starter Rainbow Mage
- Start date
I can live with it.
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
I could live with it too, if it didn't mean anything bad. If Atheists become such the majority as to start legislating against Theism in general, that would be a problem. Would this ever happen?
Probably the worst that believers would have to face would be loss of subsidies for churches.
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Revoltingist easy for you to say. I've never seen you display the slightest anti-theistic tendencies. Some Atheists on the other hand are far from being so tolerant. They have these ideas that Atheism is best for humanity and plan to take out Theists if they could. Anti-Theists they call themselves.
Of course...I don't offer any kind of warranty for my prediction.
The anti-theists are a minority...plus, we have the Constitution.
I just can't see it happening. If anything, it will help even Theistic faiths in realizing what their beliefs actually mean.
As Revoltingest said, about the worst consequence will be the loss of some subsidies and questionable privileges.
Very few people are Anti-Theists, and most Atheists would oppose them out of principle.
Noaidi
slow walker
I agree with Luis and Revoltingest. People are free to believe in whatever they want, so a predominantly atheistic society couldn't remove that right. All it would mean is that special privileges would be withdrawn - if people still wanted places of worship, then they should pay for them themselves.
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
I don't believe that people are increasingly atheistic or agnostic.
I believe that the majority of people prefer thinking about more important stuff than religion. I think it has always been so.
I believe that the majority of people prefer thinking about more important stuff than religion. I think it has always been so.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Is it? You could certainly argue that we've become more secular over the past couple hundred years or so (as states and people) but I think an argument for an increase in considered atheism/agnosticism is harder to demonstrate. It's really a question of how many of the people who in the past went to church every Sunday morning really believed and how many were simply following the social convention.
I don't think the actual social changes in this area will have all that much effect. The power and influence of (certain) religions has been slowly reducing and that will continue. Some of that will be presented by some as legislating against theism but, in general, it isn't.
Actual anti-theism has always been there as a minority and while a more secular society allows them to be more open, they remain a tiny minority with no more power and influence than the extreme pro-theism minority who oppose non-believers in exactly the same way.
Nerthus
Wanderlust
Same here.
doppelganger
Through the Looking Glass
There's been massive upheaval in the way humans live in the last two centuries, occasioned mainly by changes to our cosmological understanding of the nature of our reality, which in turn resulted from our changing needs.
Previous such changes were the birthplace of older traditions and faiths, and this is no different. The last huge wave in the formation of human religious identity coincided with the transition from village life to that of the city-state/nation and large-scale agriculture, and with it, historical mythologies that put individuals in connection with a special plan or purpose of the people of whom they were a part. As such, they were tribal mythologies of conquest, that had as their purpose their own propagation, often by violence but also by their ability to organize large numbers of people to acts of self-sacrifice for the seeming good of the group. However, they did so at a time when most of the world was not "civilized," and much was to be gained by conquering it.
What we've known as the religious traditions that have dominated human civilization for the past 2,000 years are not workable because they depend on a theology that cannot be reconciled with our current cosmology. First, there's nothing left to conquer that isn't going to cost quite a bit more to conquer it than the benefit to be reaped from doing so. Thus, tribal religions and nationalism are no longer sustainable or functional ways to relate to the universe. As conquest began to be seen as fruitless after centuries of religious warfare, the idea that any particular people had a special purpose at the center of "God's plan" for the universe began to lose its hold.
Second, in the vacuum created by this change in circumstances we had a scientific revolution in which humanity completely overhauled its cosmology. Ancient texts that talked about "the Heavens" were talking about what we now call "outer space." Indeed, die hard theists simply ignore the question of cosmology, holding a vague idea of "heaven" or "hell" as an undefined place where the various gods reside, but not actually having any conception of where or what it is. For ancient peoples, heaven was above the sky, which is why people "ascended" when they were chosen by the gods. Very few religious people conceive of "God" as inhabiting the area beyond the sky because we've been there (first with telescopes and then with spacecraft). And what we've learned is that far from our nation or our people being the chosen focus of "God's" love, this whole planet is just a satellite circling one of countless billions of stars, of which our Sun is but one rather humbly small example.
As we speak, old religious symbolism is being synchretized into a new theology and cosmology, but it takes time and there will be pockets of resistance to new ideas that will linger for centuries. Much of the transition has already occurred. Most people today adhere to the new cosmology and don't really believe in the gods of the ancient world - not even the devoutly religious, who believe in the power of their belief itself, more so than they "believe in God."
Naturalistic pantheism, which religious people call "agnostic" or "atheist" (with its doctrines like Evolution and Ecology) offers a different spirituality from tribal religions and nationalism that is better suited to the future of humanity and the needs and challenges it faces . . . which is why, in the battle for human imagination, it is kicking arse on traditional religion.
It's making more and more sense to talk about adherents of older traditions as "ascience", "anaturalists" or "acausalists".
Previous such changes were the birthplace of older traditions and faiths, and this is no different. The last huge wave in the formation of human religious identity coincided with the transition from village life to that of the city-state/nation and large-scale agriculture, and with it, historical mythologies that put individuals in connection with a special plan or purpose of the people of whom they were a part. As such, they were tribal mythologies of conquest, that had as their purpose their own propagation, often by violence but also by their ability to organize large numbers of people to acts of self-sacrifice for the seeming good of the group. However, they did so at a time when most of the world was not "civilized," and much was to be gained by conquering it.
What we've known as the religious traditions that have dominated human civilization for the past 2,000 years are not workable because they depend on a theology that cannot be reconciled with our current cosmology. First, there's nothing left to conquer that isn't going to cost quite a bit more to conquer it than the benefit to be reaped from doing so. Thus, tribal religions and nationalism are no longer sustainable or functional ways to relate to the universe. As conquest began to be seen as fruitless after centuries of religious warfare, the idea that any particular people had a special purpose at the center of "God's plan" for the universe began to lose its hold.
Second, in the vacuum created by this change in circumstances we had a scientific revolution in which humanity completely overhauled its cosmology. Ancient texts that talked about "the Heavens" were talking about what we now call "outer space." Indeed, die hard theists simply ignore the question of cosmology, holding a vague idea of "heaven" or "hell" as an undefined place where the various gods reside, but not actually having any conception of where or what it is. For ancient peoples, heaven was above the sky, which is why people "ascended" when they were chosen by the gods. Very few religious people conceive of "God" as inhabiting the area beyond the sky because we've been there (first with telescopes and then with spacecraft). And what we've learned is that far from our nation or our people being the chosen focus of "God's" love, this whole planet is just a satellite circling one of countless billions of stars, of which our Sun is but one rather humbly small example.
As we speak, old religious symbolism is being synchretized into a new theology and cosmology, but it takes time and there will be pockets of resistance to new ideas that will linger for centuries. Much of the transition has already occurred. Most people today adhere to the new cosmology and don't really believe in the gods of the ancient world - not even the devoutly religious, who believe in the power of their belief itself, more so than they "believe in God."
Naturalistic pantheism, which religious people call "agnostic" or "atheist" (with its doctrines like Evolution and Ecology) offers a different spirituality from tribal religions and nationalism that is better suited to the future of humanity and the needs and challenges it faces . . . which is why, in the battle for human imagination, it is kicking arse on traditional religion.
It's making more and more sense to talk about adherents of older traditions as "ascience", "anaturalists" or "acausalists".
Last edited:
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
It's a good start. Theists aren't normally the most impressive thinkers.
kai
ragamuffin
i can live with it too,IMHO its a start one day we can leave superstition behind us all.
People in general are lousy at thinking clearly. But theists can do an impressive job...it's only in the area of theism where I find them bonkers.It's a good start. Theists aren't normally the most impressive thinkers.
I think its more of a world wide event, but I'm not to concerned religion is natural. Its(Atheism and Agnosticism) growth was spurred by the internet and the growth of science but even this is limited and like other balloons will eventually pop.
Last edited:
Which atheists make you worried in this regard?
Most I know are ardent secularists: they don't want any involvement between government and religion at all. Negative interference is a form of involvement.
I think the big change in modern times is that the link between religion and culture has been largely broken. If you go to church, it's now because you actually believe (or maybe because your family forces you
), not because it's simply expected in your culture.The cultural centre is no longer religion. A person can fully participate in most cultures today without also participating in religious life. It is now socially acceptable to be a lapsed whatever or even an out-and-out irreligious person. I think most people have recognized that they no longer need to participate in religion, and have found that they don't want to participate either.
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
Unfortunately I don't think this is true here in Ireland.
I was watching the Dail (Parliament) the other day. They begin daily with a prayer. Schools are overwhelmingly controlled by the Church. They have hospitals etc etc
I would dismantle the church/state link in a heartbeat if I only could.
That said they are infinitely less powerful than they were. But still the link is too strong for my tastes.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
I have seen that most atheists are some of the biggest proponents of church/state separation and freedom of religion.
Religious dogma seems to promote theocratic thinking.
Religious dogma seems to promote theocratic thinking.
It's hard to quantify their numbers, but many fundies I've talked to also favor church & state separation.
They're rightly aware that it won't be their own beliefs which become law.