Theists and Religionists of All Sorts Often Can't Understand Atheism

[MineralMan]

The mindset they have regarding religion often cannot comprehend the idea of simple nonbelief. They have invested a great deal in their own beliefs and hold them firmly. That is why, so often, they attempt to define atheism as just another sort of belief. A belief system. They are incorrect to do so.

Nonbelief is not belief in any way. It is, by definition, a lack of belief. It is a rejection of belief in things that cannot be demonstrated through recognizable evidence. Atheism has much logic behind it. It is not an emotional mindset at all. It simply cannot believe in what cannot be demonstrated through evidence.

Theistic religions are emotionally based. They rely on fuzzy concepts like faith, hope, and mythology. Lacking any sort of real, observable evidence for the deities they worship, only those emotional concepts can support their belief. In order to counter people who say they can't believe things without evidence, religionists claim that they actually believe there are no gods. They insist that atheists "prove" that deities do not exist.

That's just silly. One cannot prove the nonexistence of anything. One cannot prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist, nor that unicorns are mythical creatures, invented by the human mind. Such proofs are logically impossible. More importantly, there is no need to prove unbelief. It simply is a lack of belief in things that cannot be demonstrated.

It's all quite simple, really: Theistic religions are based on belief in non-demonstrable deities. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in those things or the logical inability to believe that supernatural entities of any kind are anything more myths upheld by faith, wishful thinking, or hope.

If we can all get that straight, the need for arguments about what atheism is would end abruptly. Believers believe. Atheists don't. Simple. Theism and atheism are antonyms. They have precisely opposite meanings. Atheists typically don't care what individuals believe. Theists should not care what atheists do not believe. It doesn't really matter.

It is not belief or non-belief that matters. It is actions. Why that is not understood by everyone is a complete mystery.

[saidsimplesimon]

1. MM, actions

speak louder than words? My lack of emotional response is sometimes mistaken. Some believe in deities, or not, I really do not care. It has no impact or relevance related to my views of my existence in society.

Like so many others, I am doing the best I can with the tools available.

[vlyons]

2. Humans seem to have a need to anthromoporphize certain qualities of power and mystery

I'm a Buddhist, which is a non-theistic practice. Non-theism avoids such question as, "Well, who made god?" "What is god like?" "Where is god, when bad things happen?" It's just so much simpler and logical to focus on human ethical behavior.

[edhopper]

4. What are your beliefs

or understanding of existence outside the physical Universe?

No dieties, but is there a spirit or soul or consciousness (what ever you wish to call it) outside the body?

I am just curious.

[MineralMan]

7. Buddhism is somewhat complicated, really.

It does deal with the non-physical, but mostly without a concept of deities. However, it does recognize a non-physical reality and does talk about that. I like the philosophy and ethics of Buddhism and its approach to real life. I'm not a Buddhist, though, because I don't recognize anything beyond physical, observable reality.

[vlyons]

8. There are many different forms and schools of Buddhism

Buddhism is usually classed into Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana (Tibetan Buddhism). Only in Vajrayana (which is my interest) are there "deities" or yidams. Probably the Tibetans see the Yidams as real god-like beings. I however, understand them as imaginery beings that we humans anthropomorphize for certain qualities that we value. For example, Chenrezig represents compassion, Manjushri represents wisdom, Mahalaka represents protection. But in reality, these beings don't really exist. They are imagineray, like Santa Clause is imaginery.

There is a whole branch of Buddhist philosophy that debates the nature of reality and the nature of mind. and from there, we get into the Buddhist teachings about shunyata, or "emptiness." "Emptiness" is a very poor translation of shunyata. It took me years to understand this teaching. But it basically means that things don't exist with the subjective thoughts and feelings that we project onto them.

Suffice it to say, that Buddhism has a component for ethical behavior and a practice of using mental analysis for discovering the true nature of one's own mind, and how the mind works. Vajrayana vaguely gets into a discussion of eternal, unborn (without beginning) omnescient mind, which theists would probably call "divine Consciousness." That experience is called enlightenment. And at the same time, some Buddhists would say that your ordinary mental awareness is the same as Buddha-mind. We are supposed to sit down, observe, and contemplate our own mind to discover for ourselves what that experience is all about. It's not a belief. It's an experience that each of us can observe for ourselves. Generally, I don't believe that any god is coming to save me. Each of us is responsible for saving our own self from the bondage of mental suffering, caused by delusional ideas and negative emotions.

Personally, I'm not certain if the mind continues after the death of the body, but I am open to the possibility. If it is true, then I want to make as certain as possible in this life right now that the mind that I take with me is predisposed and well-practised in loving kindness and open-ness to dealing with whatever comes my way. That's my 2 cents.

[MineralMan]

9. Thanks. I'm familiar with Buddhism.

There's much to admire in it, and I've adopted some of its concepts in my life. For me, mindfulness is the most important concept. It can expand to hold most of the rest, really.

I'm not much for formal systems of thinking, really. They have never seemed necessary to me. I have no use for concepts of mind that continue beyond physical death, either. I don't see the utility of that.

I guess I'm someone who tries to live in the present, with mindfulness, and to contemplate the past as a lesson, and to wonder what lies ahead, but not to plan overmuch. So far, that has all worked to keep me sane and steady on my path. That path changes constantly, and has done so all my life, so I try not to have fixed ideas of what the future will be. The Now is sufficiently interesting.

[vlyons]

10. The nice thing about Buddhism is

that Buddha taught so many different ways to traverse a path to enlightenment, depending on the skill, intelligence, culture, etc of each individual. It is a vast and profound path. We are so lucky to have been exposed to it and to have taken the initiative to understand and practice its teachings, according to our own individual understanding.

[wryter2000]

3. I think I understand atheism pretty well

But then, even though I attend church regularly and am very active in the parish, I'm agnostic.

I have no problem with atheism or atheists. I don't appreciate the sort of atheists who can't seem to abide the notion that someone else might believe in a deity.

I'm well aware that many Christians want to force their religion on others. I hate that, and as a religious person, I'll fight it. But I wish people here would recognize that DUers don't fall in that category of Christianism. We are not the enemy.

[edhopper]

5. Don't mistake vigorous debate in this forum

for dismissal of Christian Democrats in other areas.

The purpose here is to discuss religion in any way we want. (staying within the SOP).

It is a good place for a free spirited debate.

[MineralMan]

6. I truly don't care what anyone believes. It's of no significance to me.

It is behavior that interests me. The Religion Group on DU is a place where we can talk about such things. That's good. There aren't actually that many active religionists in the Group. But, it's a place to hash things out and discuss anything having to do with Religion.

In my ordinary life, religious issues and arguments might as well not exist. That's almost never a topic of conversation. This is a different place, where religion IS the topic of conversation.

[wryter2000]

11. Totally agreed

What's important is how one acts toward others, and I don't think religiosity has anything to do with that.

[Mariana]

12. Are there any atheists like that on DU?

The ones "who can't seem to abide the notion that someone else might believe in a deity" or who don't "recognize that DUers don't fall in that category of Christianism"?

[wryter2000]

13. Yes

I've seen plenty of anti-deism posts that are quite insulting and seem to be motivated by anger as much as reason.

[Lordquinton]

14. What's wrong with being motivated by anger?

Anger is the driving force behind most social changes.