Will Atheism Replace Religion?

[The Neo Nerd]

Oh well, you're right, Mickiel.

We ARE going after your God.

And after we're through with him, you're next in line. Good luck.

All god's bases are belong to us

-Q

 

[ChristineES]

I don't see how atheism and religion could replace one another- they are two different things. That would be like saying that grapes will replace apples- both are fruit but are totally different- different flavor, color (sometimes), etc.

 

[andys]

Considering that the number of uneducated, irrational, superstitious people shall forever outnumber the educated, rational, freethinkers of the world, does not offer me much hope for a secular world.

Coupled with the insidious Islamic threat that is spreading at an alarming rate, the prognosis for a nonsecular world, in my honest opinion, is a sad inevitability.

 

[Archer]

Archer
Interesting answer for a believer!

Actions speak words are just what they are, air slightly warmed by the lungs and expelled into the big BS pile of organized religion.

I only said, I believe in the Bible, that is for me believing in the truth and philosophy of it. I claim no religion because I don't want to associate myself with most of the followers. Though many find fault, contradiction and falsifies. Many see killing and a murderous God in the Old testament and contradictions in the New. I take them for what they are, nothing more. There are no contradictions as it should all be t6aken in context. I am a little hard on the Atheists about this but the followers of the Bible and most othe books of faith do the same and more. They are not interested in what the books say in totality only picking one verse and taking it out of context of the entire book.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Whether atheism could replace religion is irrelevant. The real question is whether rationality could replace irrationality.

 

[Rhizomatic]

First off, the question makes a number of completely false presumptions about atheism and religion, most importantly that they are incompatible. Atheist religions date back for at least 3,000 years. The article seems to be based upon the assumption that religion automatically means faith in supernatural beings and dogma (which it doesn't; there are plenty of religions without either) and that atheism means a lack of belief in the supernatural and a denial of all religions (when it is merely a lack of belief in gods).

So if you want to sidestep Barber not knowing what the word "atheism" means, there are two questions that he could actually be asking: "will lack of religion replace religion" (no) or "will lack of faith in supernatural forces replace faith in supernatural forces" (probably not anytime soon).

I think that religion is here to say, at least for the foreseeable future. Religion has been pretty much a human universal; for whatever reason we have an innate urge to create/ find meaning, and that tends to be very commonly expressed along the lines of some form of sacred reality. Even if it wasn't just a blatant lie to suggest that all religions "require slavish conformity to unscientific beliefs", people tend to think very unscientifically in their personal lives and in large groups. If the world was to suddenly become much more developed I do think that there is something to be said for the idea that certain forms of religion would become passed over in favor of other social phenomena, but even aside from the wild unlikelihood of such an event religion has proven itself to be nothing if not adaptable. I don't think it's a coincidence that more religions that do not conflict with science and/or do not have requisite dogma are emerging from "more developed" (I kind of cringe at that phrase...) societies, and so I think that if we were suddenly to arrive at a world-wide utopia we would simply see more religions like Unitarian Universalism, engaged Buddhism, LaVeyan Satanism, and so forth.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't see how atheism and religion could replace one another- they are two different things. That would be like saying that grapes will replace apples- both are fruit but are totally different- different flavor, color (sometimes), etc.

Behold!

 

[andys]

Rhizomatic,

Your remark "Atheist religions date back for at least 3,000 years" is a contradiction in terms.

Atheists are without religious beliefs. They never have, they never will.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Rhizomatic,

Your remark "Atheist religions date back for at least 3,000 years" is a contradiction in terms.

Atheists are without religious beliefs. They never have, they never will.

There's more to religion than belief in deities. Some religious people are indeed atheists.

You probably couldn't swing a cat in a UU congregation without hitting at least a few atheists.

 

[Rhizomatic]

Rhizomatic,

Your remark "Atheist religions date back for at least 3,000 years" is a contradiction in terms.

Atheists are without religious beliefs. They never have, they never will.

In popular speech in the contemporary UK and United States "atheism" is often understood to mean "lack of/ opposition to religion", but that's just a matter of common usage like how people approach agnosticism as a magical middle-ground between belief/ lack of belief in deities. In academia (ie: religious studies) the term is pretty consistently used to mean lack of belief in deities, and so belief systems like Confucianism, Buddhism, Jainism, LaVeyan Satanism, which either lack reference to or openly deny deities are considered atheist religions.

 

[Falvlun]

Behold!

"This Patent Pending process is complex and the ingredient mix primarily includes concentrated grape flavor and pure water....There is nothing but flavor being infused into the apple. A relaxing bathing process prepares our apples for you or your kids. "

I fear for the human race... Really. We're now injecting "grape flavor" into a perfectly fine apple.

 

[ChristineES]

While I agree that atheism itself is not a religion, but there are religions that have no God- they would be religious but atheist. I suppose that is why there is a difference between faith and religion, between theists and religious.

 

[Sunstone]

Rhizomatic,

Your remark "Atheist religions date back for at least 3,000 years" is a contradiction in terms.

Atheists are without religious beliefs. They never have, they never will.

Atheists are without belief in gods. That does not mean they are without religious beliefs.

 

[Sunstone]

Whether atheism could replace religion is irrelevant. The real question is whether rationality could replace irrationality.

Not until our successor species has evolved -- at the very least.

 

[TheBotanicalDolly]

I doubt it, humans usually need something to cling to in order to get by, and most especially to explain the unexplainable. Deity or not, I think religion will be here to stay for quite a number of years to come.

 

[Tiapan]

Education will shine light on the wisdom of ages and the secrets of the universe, pushing back the dark veil of superstition.

It is inevitable

Cheers

 

[Ravishing Witch]

I voted no. I believe that religious views are mainly passed down from generation to generation. Granted, my family showed me the ways of the Baptist life, and I am far from that now, I still didn't totally abandon a higher power all together.

I just thought I'd make it known that not everyone that believes in a higher power is looking for an explanation to things that they can't explain. Sometimes people are just comforted by the knowledge that there is something out there that they can tell it all to and not feel ashamed. Or maybe, the thought of some form of punishment from said higher power, keeps some people from crossing that line into chaos. Just a thought.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I doubt it, humans usually need something to cling to in order to get by, and most especially to explain the unexplainable.

Trying to explain the unexplainable seems like a fool's errand to me, and certainly not something that anyone could actually need.

Deity or not, I think religion will be here to stay for quite a number of years to come.

I agree with this bit.

 

[Storm]

To the op, it depends on what you mean by "replace." Will religion die out? No, of course not. But atheism may well take religion's current place of dominance.

First, as others have rightly pointed out, religion and God-belief are not synonymous. There are religious atheists and irreligious believers.

However, I maintain that even God-belief will not be eradicated, simply because the experiences that inspire it are functions of our biology. To truly leave belief behind, we would need to drastically alter our neurophysiology. Somehow, I don't see that happening.

That said, those events are relatively rare. As the world continues to progress, those who lack personal experience may well turn in increasing numbers to atheism.The studies done in Europe seem to support this. (Though it bears repeating that atheists can be religious, too.)

 

[Storm]

Atheism is the default position. No one is born with any knowledge of a god concept. It is something we are taught.

That's not atheism, it's agnosticism. [/picky]