Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

70 (27.6%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

113 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (24%)

Total Members Voted: 249

[Orange Wizard]

I vote Richard Dawkins for atheist pope

[Angle]

I vote Richard Dawkins for atheist pope

Haha no thats fine. I think having books to argue over is perfectly sufficient.

[TD1]

I vote the God Delusion as the atheist holy book?

I mean, I don't think it should happen, but if we gotta choose....

[Rolepgeek]

An "Un-Holy Book" would suggest cohesion and a sharing of ideas between atheists - a form of uniformity. The only thing uniting atheists is that they don't believe in a form of divinity - any book seeking to be for atheists could only contain that one shared ideal. Anything else from morals and ethics to what foods to eat varies from person to person.

I will point out, while "Uniformity" isn't something I'd use to describe us, we DO hang out together and share ideas, and while there isn't anything we completely agree on except Atheism (And even that is very arguable) you are much likelier to find that you have things in common with other atheists than with theists. And again, the point is to help us formulate what we believe so that we can disagree on it, and thereby stimulate discussion and new ideas.

What's your basis for that belief? Two of my past three best friends have been religious(and the third was from when we were you going to really care). Atheism is a poor flag to rally around, unless it's Richard Dawkins style militant and/or "being-a-dick" atheism.

Besides which, there is currently an ongoing project to make a wikipedia style database for arguments and lines of thinking.

[Angle]

An "Un-Holy Book" would suggest cohesion and a sharing of ideas between atheists - a form of uniformity. The only thing uniting atheists is that they don't believe in a form of divinity - any book seeking to be for atheists could only contain that one shared ideal. Anything else from morals and ethics to what foods to eat varies from person to person.

I will point out, while "Uniformity" isn't something I'd use to describe us, we DO hang out together and share ideas, and while there isn't anything we completely agree on except Atheism (And even that is very arguable) you are much likelier to find that you have things in common with other atheists than with theists. And again, the point is to help us formulate what we believe so that we can disagree on it, and thereby stimulate discussion and new ideas.

What's your basis for that belief? Two of my past three best friends have been religious(and the third was from when we were you going to really care). Atheism is a poor flag to rally around, unless it's Richard Dawkins style militant and/or "being-a-dick" atheism.

Besides which, there is currently an ongoing project to make a wikipedia style database for arguments and lines of thinking.

Because I've encountered plenty of different atheists both online and IRL, and we've had a fair amount in common - similar view on politics, science, philosophy, etc.

Oh, and can I get a link to that? It sounds really cool. Unless you mean arbital, which I already saw.

[TD1]

I think you're mistaken - from what I've seen, I agree/disagree with atheists as much as any theist. We just don't differ on one point, as a rule, heh.

[Loud Whispers]

I would support an atheist pope just as long as every atheist pope actually hated being atheist pope

[Angle]

I would support an atheist pope just as long as every atheist pope actually hated being atheist pope

That is absolutely guaranteed by the nature of the position.

[Angle]

I think you're mistaken - from what I've seen, I agree/disagree with atheists as much as any theist. We just don't differ on one point, as a rule, heh.

No, I'm quite certain of my experiences. They may or may not be representative of a broader pattern, but that is what I've experienced.

[Rolepgeek]

Because I've encountered plenty of different atheists both online and IRL, and we've had a fair amount in common - similar view on politics, science, philosophy, etc.

Oh, and can I get a link to that? It sounds really cool. Unless you mean arbital, which I already saw.

My point is that I've met plenty of people, period, who I've had a fair amount in common with. Rarely are the religious people fundamentalists, but one of those friendships was founded on religious debate. I dislike echo chambers most of the time, and some of the atheists I know are kinda dicks about it. Which I don't really put up with because being condescending to someone about their beliefs is a shitty thing to do. Besides which, there's a lot of different possible philosophies within atheism, just like there's about a thousand or so different sects of Christianity. Some people are nihilist, some existentialist. Some are still spiritual, others very materialistic. Nature of good and what we should strive for to be good is a big one there, too. That's the type of thing you build a community around. Around the belief in debate and contesting ideas, and trying to find truth, or about doing good things. Not about 'we don't believe there's a god! Take that!'.

That was what I was getting at. Also, I believe DwArfY1 was saying that you are mistaken as to it being part of a broader pattern.

But yes, I meant arbital. Took me forever to find/remember the name of it.

[Orange Wizard]

Atheism is too broad a thing to build a religion around. You either need a very specific interpretation of atheism, like Buddhism, /r/atheism-style antireligious wank, or you could focus on one specific aspect of it, like... I dunno, scientific method? That'd be more of a social club than a church, though.

[Angle]

there's a lot of different possible philosophies within atheism, just like there's about a thousand or so different sects of Christianity. Some people are nihilist, some existentialist. Some are still spiritual, others very materialistic. Nature of good and what we should strive for to be good is a big one there, too. That's the type of thing you build a community around. Around the belief in debate and contesting ideas, and trying to find truth, or about doing good things.

Yeah, thats the point. That's what I want the book for - so that we can all argue about what should be in it, write our own versions, change them, etc, etc. Christianity has, in my opinion, been significantly enriched by competition and diversity between it's sects, and I want to harness that same power for atheistic philosophy. Right now atheism is kind of an amorphous mass, and I want to organize things a bit better. So when someone says "What kind of atheist are you?" You can link them the page for your variation of the book, and maybe drop a few common keywords like "Existentialist/Nihilist/Materialist" the same way christians can say "Baptist/Catholic/Evangelical".

You see what I'm getting at, or am I still failing my speech checks?

Edit: I don't want a single grand religion to rule them all and in the darkness bind them, I want a boatload of competing sects with different ideas I can pick and choose between.

[Rolepgeek]

there's a lot of different possible philosophies within atheism, just like there's about a thousand or so different sects of Christianity. Some people are nihilist, some existentialist. Some are still spiritual, others very materialistic. Nature of good and what we should strive for to be good is a big one there, too. That's the type of thing you build a community around. Around the belief in debate and contesting ideas, and trying to find truth, or about doing good things.

Yeah, thats the point. That's what I want the book for - so that we can all argue about what should be in it, write our own versions, change them, etc, etc. Christianity has, in my opinion, been significantly enriched by competition and diversity between it's sects, and I want to harness that same power for atheistic philosophy. Right now atheism is kind of an amorphous mass, and I want to organize things a bit better. So when someone says "What kind of atheist are you?" You can link them the page for your variation of the book, and maybe drop a few common keywords like "Existentialist/Nihilist/Materialist" the same way christians can say "Baptist/Catholic/Evangelical".

You see what I'm getting at, or am I still failing my speech checks?

Or you can just ask "What kind of philosophy do you have?" It really doesn't need to be about atheism, is my point. There's already a lot of places and a lot of instances of such competition between philosophy, in any case. It's already there. We don't need anything new for it. It's been saturated. At most, we need something so we can avoid interminable arguments and going over the same basic stuff over and over again.

Besides...Hundred Years War wasn't what I would call 'enriching'.

[Orange Wizard]

Besides...Hundred Years War wasn't what I would call 'enriching'.

Assuming you mean the Thirty Years War, that was more political than religious. Though it's hard to draw the line when church and state is so deeply intertwined.
It's more an argument for separation of the powers than it is an argument against theological discourse.

[Rolepgeek]

Besides...Hundred Years War wasn't what I would call 'enriching'.

Assuming you mean the Thirty Years War, that was more political than religious. Though it's hard to draw the line when church and state is so deeply intertwined.
It's more an argument for separation of the powers than it is an argument against theological discourse.

Also Ireland. Sectarian violence is not fun. Discourse is good, but my point is that Christianity's competitive marketplace of ideas opened whole other cans of worms in the past.