... and all evidence points to our actual default position being a rudimentary form of animism anyhow, not atheism or agnosticism. [/extra picky]
-
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!
Will Atheism Replace Religion?
- Thread starter Sententia
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I doubt it will. I can see Agnosticism becoming a more major belief. It wouldn't surprise me if right handed religions do dwindle in numbers and popularity though, although they never will be replaced.
And as the article points out, it is largely based on economical development. So while developed nations may have fewer people looking towards God to fix their lives, there will probably always be impoverished areas in the world.
And as the article points out, it is largely based on economical development. So while developed nations may have fewer people looking towards God to fix their lives, there will probably always be impoverished areas in the world.
Rhizomatic
Vaguely (Post)Postmodern
If you want to be super picky people are born atheist (they lack knowledge of, and thus belief in, gods) and cannot become agnostic (the belief that man cannot, currently or ever, have absolute knowledge about gods) until they learn about the concept. [/pickier than everyone else]
Knowledge is not a requirement for belief. We all believe many things that we do not know.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
But we know of those things. I can only believe in a mythical creature after I've heard about it, not before.
Ah... okay. I don't think I got Rhizomatic's meaning. I thought he meant that because a baby doesn't have knowledge of God, it wouldn't have belief in God. I getcha now: you can't "believe in God" until the term "God" has some sort of definition. Yeah, I think that makes sense.
it's_sam
Freak of Nature
even at a basic form we are contained and controlled by gravity, our lives are influanced to be active by a "force". you cant say there is no power over us when we are driven by our own ambitions daily. we grow in our selves to offer something to the world, and we do that willingly or not. you will grow and life will continue, the question you want an answer to, or dont care about, is "is there anything after death". we have all heard every side of that, and we still question if its real? how real is this orange in my hand? not real at all because i have no orange to grab, what do you percieve?
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
I'd reverse that, personally, but we're getting off topic.
Wannabe Yogi
Well-Known Member
I believe Atheism will grow in numbers but will not push out theism. I think this is a good thing for religion for the following reasons:
-Many people who claim they believe in God really don't care much about religion. It seems that it is the default position of most people in America. This will just make it so people can be more honest with them selves and others.
-If religion has a lot of power (Like you need to believe in God to be elected president), then the wrong type of people become attracted to it to get power.
-If there is no worldly benefit to faith then we who have an interest will be more likely to be left to our own devices to follow it were it leads.
-Politics and education will be less corrupted by peoples religious beliefs.
-
-Many people who claim they believe in God really don't care much about religion. It seems that it is the default position of most people in America. This will just make it so people can be more honest with them selves and others.
-If religion has a lot of power (Like you need to believe in God to be elected president), then the wrong type of people become attracted to it to get power.
-If there is no worldly benefit to faith then we who have an interest will be more likely to be left to our own devices to follow it were it leads.
-Politics and education will be less corrupted by peoples religious beliefs.
-
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by dogsgod
Atheism is the default position. No one is born with any knowledge of a god concept. It is something we are taught.
We must be taught about a god concept before we can take an agnostic approach to the question of its existence. We are born without any concept of gods, therefore atheism is the default position.
Atheism is the default position. No one is born with any knowledge of a god concept. It is something we are taught.
We must be taught about a god concept before we can take an agnostic approach to the question of its existence. We are born without any concept of gods, therefore atheism is the default position.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
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.
The same can be said of belief in a flat earth. Most people don't believe the world is flat although for most of civilization most of the population did believe it was flat. Eventually education will eradicate the belief in gods, it's just a matter of time.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That is difficult to say. People are not born with knowledge of anything except for the most basic urges, such as hunger and thirst. It is entirely possible that if someone in a hypothetical situation of having absolutely no influence in terms of God, spirits, atheism, or any other such related terms, that they simple did not put any thought at all into it, which would put them into a situation of being entirely neutral. Now if they did think about it, then they could sway towards theism, atheism, or agnostic. That would just depend on the person.[/uber pickyness] But if I had to guess, I would say that most people would end up agnostic, considering that this "Truman" has had no outside influences and thus has not heard of any definite proofs or disproofs.
And as far as not being able to be something until you have heard of the concept simple is not true. I was following many of the core Left Handed Path values long before I knew what it was.
Rhizomatic
Vaguely (Post)Postmodern
That assumes that atheism is a positive belief. If we understand atheism as "lack of belief in deities", there is no such thing as neutral. There is 1) you have belief in deities or 2) you lack belief in deities. If you have no concept of deities, you lack belief in deities, and are an atheist. For this reason all agnostics are also either theists or atheists; agnosticism is a belief about human knowledge about god, not a belief about god.
I tend to agree, Rhizomatic.
But as it turns out, Theism isn't always a positive belief either. It is arguably more easily found as a vague hope, a fallback belief of sorts.
It might be best classified as Animism or even as Passive Animism instead of as Theism, however.
But as it turns out, Theism isn't always a positive belief either. It is arguably more easily found as a vague hope, a fallback belief of sorts.
It might be best classified as Animism or even as Passive Animism instead of as Theism, however.
logician
Well-Known Member
But the vast majority of "religious" people believe in some god.
Do they? I'm quite skeptic on this matter, Logician. Most so-called "non-practicing Catholics" here in Brazil don't really give much evidence either way. Belief in Gods is sortta weird among Buddhists and Taoists AFAIK. Even in Shinto one could argue that there isn't even a true belief in gods. The Kami aren't gods.