09th Apr 2010
FTW?
So I learned yesterday that atheism is a religion. At a college. In a college-level class.
That is just so ass backward that I feel compelled to say “FTW?”
I argued that atheism cannot be a religion based on the definition of religion we were given; the response of the instructor was to change the definition.
The definition as given was that a religion is a “system of beliefs regarding conduct in accordance with either divine commands found in sacred writings, or declared by authoritative teachers.” My argument that atheism is not a “system” of anything prompted the suggestion that “system” be removed from the definition. Okay.
A fellow student argued that there are religions that do not believe in a divine being (Buddhism being the most common) and so atheism could be a religion. He had a point; perhaps I needed to look at the definition of “atheism” as well.
And so here is my system-less definition of religion (courtesy of Wikipedia):
A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
To avoid getting caught up in the differences between various religions and the diverse sects within some of those religions, I’m happy to trim that definition to its most basic: a religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.
So what is atheism? Again, courtesy of Wikipedia:
Atheism is commonly described as the position that there are no deities.[1] It can also mean the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[2]
Let’s look at these two definitions separately and see if they fit in with the definition of a religion.
First we have the “position that there are no deities”. While this certainly could be an aspect of a “set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe”, it doesn’t stand on its own as a religion any more than “monotheism” can stand on its own as a religion. This was the Buddhism argument posited by my fellow student. However, simply holding an atheistic position does not necessarily indicate a belief in anything else. Where is the “set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe”?
If atheism were a religion, someone should be able to answer that question. There is no answer however because atheism does not fit the definition of a religion.
Shall we move on to the second definition: the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. I suspect this is what was meant in class when atheism was described as a religion. Again, it does not fit the definition because it does not provide a set of beliefs concerning the cause, blah blah blah.
It’s simple logic:
A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.
Christianity is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.
Therefore, Christianity is a religion.
Buddhism is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.
Therefore, Buddhism is a religion.
Atheism is the position that there are no deities; it does not encompass any other beliefs.
Therefore, atheism is not a religion.
Monotheism is the position that there is a single deity; it does not encompass any other beliefs.
Therefore, monotheism is not a religion.
Atheism is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities; it does not encompass any other beliefs.
Therefore, atheism is not a religion.
Polytheism is the belief in the existence of many deities; it does not encompass any other beliefs.
Therefore, polytheism is not a religion.
As far as gods go, I take the position that there are no deities; while you might call me an atheist, I prefer the term “godless heathen”.
As for what I do believe in? Well, I believe in the laws of physics. Please call me a physicist.
Apparently I am also a physicist but I consider myself more closely aligned to agnostics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable.[1] Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the differences between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief.
I would further argue that Christianity, Buddhism, etc are not necessarily religions. They are a set of core beliefs shared by a sometimes disparate group of people. Those beliefs morph into Religion when the beliefs are formalized and parameters dictated by elites who wish to wield power over the minions. Sort of like a dictatorial government. “Religion” seems to be what the historical Christ rose up against and whose protest brought about his gruesome demise.
http://www.bible.ca/ef/expository-matthew-23.htm
FTW? For the win? You mean WTF, right?
Nope, I mean FTW…fuck the what?
That’s how ass-backward the concept of atheism as a religion is…