This subject has been mentioned a few times to me, so I thought I would weigh in my thoughts on it.
Of course, like many things, the definition of what constitutes a "religion" is different for many people. If your argument is that a religion is solely your beliefs about God, then yes, I could see you arguing that atheism is a religion. In a similar respect, one can be "spiritual" yet not ascribe to a religion (and that would also be a religion). There are many parallels between religion and atheism, but beyond having a stance about your belief in god, the two subjects differ greatly.
Atheism is a lack of belief in god or gods. That's it. Although I don't believe in a Christian God, I also don't believe in the Hindu gods, the Greek gods, the Norse gods, Wiccan gods, etc. If my dis-belief is the definition of my religion, then we are all part of that religion. If you believe in a Christian God, then you are an atheist to the Wiccan gods. Does that mean your religion (even though you may be a Christian) is now Atheism?
In the same respect, my lack of belief in a god is no more a religion then my lack of belief in ghosts, bogeymen, alien abductions, and chupacabra are.
Atheism doesn't have any doctrine it follows. There is no dogma. There are no ceremonies. There are no holidays. There are no holy men, and there is no organization.
Of course, Atheism has it's heroes, and it's books. There are guys like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Bill Maher. We have books like, "The God Delusion" and "Why I am not a Christian". But none of these things are pre-requisites to being an atheist. I can choose to dis-agree with Hitchens, or Maher, or Dawkins (and I do sometimes), and I can still be an atheist. I don't agree with everything written in "The God Delusion", I think Bill Maher is an ass, and I think Christopher Hitchens is a crass jerk. I am allowed to think critically about the things these people say. I'm allowed to disagree with them about their opinions, and sometimes I do. This doesn't make me any less atheist.
The major difference I see between Religion and Atheism isn't necessarily even what our beliefs are, but how we come about believing them. In a nutshell: Religions take a belief and try to find evidence to support it. Atheists takes evidence and build their belief from the information they have. Of course this is an over-generalization. No one fits neatly into one or the other category. But I think it is an overall fairly accurate description.
That being said, there are different organized groups that have core atheist beliefs. I think it would be safe to argue that these border on being religions. Humanism is a perfect example. But one doesn't have to be a humanist if they are an atheist.
One other thing that I wanted to address in this post, but am unsure where to put it is: I consider there to be at least two different classes of Atheists. For lack of a better term, let's call them Hard and Soft Atheists.
A "Soft" atheist is someone who doesn't believe in a god, but doesn't necessarily have strong reasoning why. They haven't really studied the arguments, or possibly haven't even thought much about god at all. They just know they don't believe. They do not have strong convictions on the subject. I would consider them to be just a small step to the "no god" side of agnosticism.
A "Hard" atheist is someone who has thought about the subject, and has studied the arguments for and against belief in god. These people generally have very strong convictions.
The reason I make this distinction is because I've been describing overall generalizations of atheists. My descriptions will most likely fit "hard" atheists much better than they will, "soft" atheists.
Well, thanks for reading.
Until next time,
-Mike
No comments:
Post a Comment