NationStates Jolt Archive

While it seems like an oxymoron, there are some athiestic faiths (such as Confucianism). I was wondering if any of you knew of such faiths, and could tell me more about them. If there arn't any besides Kongfuzi's philosophy... then, uh... sorry to have wasted your time. ;)

do I have to pull this out again? *sigh*

Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary,

pg. 969
religion: #4 A cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

pg. 408
(1) faith: 2 b (1) firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) complete confidence 3 something that is believed esp with strong conviction; esp: a system of religious beliefs
(2) faith: BELIEVE, TRUST

pg. 70
atheism: 1 b the doctrine that there is no diety

pg. 333
doctrine: 2 b principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief


Thus:
Atheism is doctrine, or set of principles, and since there is no concrete proof, you must have faith in it.
Thus:
Atheism is principles that are held with faith.

I'm seeing a pattern here, but maybe that's just me...

I'm sorry, I have NO idea what any of that meant... Sorry. Can you re-phrase that?

I'm sorry, I have NO idea what any of that meant... Sorry. Can you re-phrase that?

He is trying to do some "connect the dots" in dictionary definitions to support the notion that atheism, in and of itself, is a religion.

That work for ya?

If not:
A religion is principle held with faith.
Atheism is doctrine.
Doctrine is principle.
Atheism is doctrine which is principle, held to with faith since there is no concrete proof.
Thus, atheism is a religion.

He is trying to do some "connect the dots" in dictionary definitions to support the notion that atheism, in and of itself, is a religion.


That work for ya?

If not:
A religion is principle held with faith.
Atheism is doctrine.
Doctrine is principle.
Atheism is doctrine which is principle, held to with faith since there is no concrete proof.
Thus, atheism is a religion.


Oh, I see. Well, I think I was misunderstood (not his fault, mine...). I meant, are there any religions that do not hold belief in a diety, thus making it an athiest religion, as opposed to a polythiestic, or monothiestic faith.

I did use the word correctly... I hope *grimace*.

He is trying to do some "connect the dots" in dictionary definitions to support the notion that atheism, in and of itself, is a religion.
No one's given me a good reason why not...so...

I'm sorry, I have NO idea what any of that meant... Sorry. Can you re-phrase that?
He was saying, that although Athiests say they follow no religion, Athiesm is a religion. They firmly believe there is no god or anything, their firm unshakable belief is constituted a religion.

Oh, I see. Well, I think I was misunderstood (not his fault, mine...). I meant, are there any religions that do not hold belief in a diety, thus making it an athiest religion, as opposed to a polythiestic, or monothiestic faith.

I did use the word correctly... I hope *grimace*.
Yeah you did. Some people tend to mix agnosticism and atheism. You got it right though.
But no, I didn't misunderstand you, i was just pointing out that atheism as a whole is a religion.

It's all good.

Yeah you did. Some people tend to mix agnosticism and atheism. You got it right though.
But no, I didn't misunderstand you, i was just pointing out that atheism as a whole is a religion.

It's all good.


Hmm... I see.

That work for ya?

If not:
A religion is principle held with faith.
Atheism is doctrine.
Doctrine is principle.
Atheism is doctrine which is principle, held to with faith since there is no concrete proof.
Thus, atheism is a religion.

Your assumption then pretty much means that any time people do not believe in something that others do believe in - it constitutes a religion as somehow the onus is on the non-belieiver to prove the negative.

There are those who firmly believe that aliens landed at Roswell. I am not one of them. I believe this without having to prove the negative - which is to say, without having to prove that aliens did NOT land at Roswell. Aparently, according to you, this constitutes my having a religious belief in the non-landings of aliens....


Your whole argument hinges on the the word "doctrine" used in that definition of atheism, and then you connect that to the term "principle" via the 2b definition of that word.


This is specious logic based on imperfect definitions of the English language.

Indeed, you could negate that argument simply by switching dictionaries.


atheism

\A"the*ism\, n. [Cf. F. ath['e]isme.

1. The disbelief or denial of the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being.
2. Godlessness.

--Merriam-Webster's Unabridged Dictionary

Anyway - don't mean to hijack the thread.

Sorry.

The only religion I have any real knowledge of that is not deity-centric is Buddhism.

hmm, afaik satanism (according to La Vey) implies absence of any gods or superior beings.
( I meant religion where Satan is no actual god, but a impersonification of your needs and desires. Not to be worshipped but rather for justyfing your actions )

I hope that's what Arx asked for.

Thus:
Atheism is doctrine,
No, it isn't. It's a lack of belief/doctrine. Try again.

Your assumption then pretty much means that any time people do not believe in something that others do believe in - it constitutes a religion as somehow the onus is on the non-belieiver to prove the negative.

There are those who firmly believe that aliens landed at Roswell. I am not one of them. I believe this without having to prove the negative - which is to say, without having to prove that aliens did NOT land at Roswell. Aparently, according to you, this constitutes my having a religious belief in the non-landings of aliens....


Your whole argument hinges on the the word "doctrine" used in that definition of atheism, and then you connect that to the term "principle" via the 2b definition of that word.


This is specious logic based on imperfect definitions of the English language.

Indeed, you could negate that argument simply by switching dictionaries.


atheism

\A"the*ism\, n. [Cf. F. ath['e]isme.

1. The disbelief or denial of the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being.
2. Godlessness.

--Merriam-Webster's Unabridged Dictionary

First off, I'm saying that what you BELIEVE makes it a religion. You do not believe that aliens landed. But that doesn't mean you believe that they didn't. There is a difference.
This would be the difference between agnosticism and atheism. Agnostics may not believe that there is a God, but they never believe that there isn't.
When asked, "is there a God/gods?"
"religions" say, "Yes."
Agnostics say, "Yes or no. Maybe."
Atheists say, "No."

In saying no, they are putting faith in something. They are believing that they are true. I'm trying to think of a good example, but having some trouble...

Anyway - don't mean to hijack the thread.

Sorry.


Indeed. Sorry. Won't say another word about it here.

First off, I'm saying that what you BELIEVE makes it a religion. You do not believe that aliens landed. But that doesn't mean you believe that they didn't. There is a difference.
This would be the difference between agnosticism and atheism. Agnostics may not believe that there is a God, but they never believe that there isn't.
When asked, "is there a God/gods?"
"religions" say, "Yes."
Agnostics say, "Yes or no. Maybe."
Atheists say, "No."

In saying no, they are putting faith in something. They are believing that they are true. I'm trying to think of a good example, but having some trouble...

So by switching my syntax to "I believe that aliens did not land at Roswell", I suddenly get religion?

Gimme a break.

You are parsing words and using an improper argument based, as I mentioned, on a single dictionary's definitions that happens to let you try and build this logical fallacy.

atheism IN and OF ITSELF is NOT a religion

sure, there are religions that are atheist, lets do the old school cricle, but first i will do a basic translation of atheism

a- prefix, means without, theism - belief in god(s)
atheism- without belief in gods

now for some old school math

big circle = ATHEISM
little circle encompassed by big circle - ATHEIST RELIGION, includes buddhism, confucionism, whatver that is, etc

... anyway, back to the thread topic.

good starting places, to determine whether you think these religions are atheist or not (since one's definition of "god" may vary)

Buddhism
Jainism (this one's good, very peaceful, and a truly an atheist religion)

note the distinction between strong and weak atheism:
* Weak atheism, or negative atheism, is the standpoint that there is no reason to believe that any particular god exists. A weak atheist sees no reality in any god he's been told about, and doesn't expect to ever find a god he can believe is real. This is not equivalent to agnosticism; an agnostic believes he does not or can not have enough information to say for certain whether any gods exist.

* Strong atheism, or positive atheism, goes further to make the assertion that there are no such things as gods. This may include the opinion that the existence of a god is logically impossible; strong atheists base this on logical a priori arguments intending to demonstrate that omnipotent, omniscient, and/or transcendent conceptions of "God" are self-contradictory or internally inconsistent.

(from the Wikipedia)

So by switching my syntax to "I believe that aliens did not land at Roswell", I suddenly get religion?

Yeah, I agree with that.

"I believe in absence of something" is still a belief, isn't it?
"I have no opinion about that" <- that's no belief at all.

And - after all - everything is a belief, I believe in atoms, but I've never seen nor touched any. That belief is coherent with many others. But reality is an illusion. We can't say that reality is true and we're not in smth like Matrix. It is still possible.
Infact you see an image of world that's created in your brain - that's sure that at least some aspects are reflected wrong.
Difference between belief and knowledge is purely conventional.