Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
There you go, I'm re-li-gion-less!
Jamie from the land of Lost Wages,
The issue is “What actuates your actions and thoughts?” As a sentient being, do you initiate all your actions? Are you, yourself, the origin of all you do, think and are OR do you blame the crap you do on an external force/being/concept? Are you purely the effect of cause OR are you responsible for all that which you do?
The ire and offense that more expressive atheists express when they feel one of their central core beliefs have been attack or diminished precisely mirrors the ire and offense that folk who require belief in an entity to rationalize their unaddressed need to handle the unfathomable.
I will admit that ascribing the very quality of beingness to the concept procribing that very quality of beingness is very human. Again, Sky-wizards are not required for this conversation.
@Blue Mark, you can have religion without belonging to an organized group. But if you belong to no clubs, no religions at all: you were the kid in High School with ZERO activities, somone else INSISTING that you are in a clubless club, or an inactive activity. . .well, it wants to make you bang your head against a wall.
One can have a religion without being a member of an organized "club", denomination, sect, group etc.
@MDFISHER272:
You are absolutely incorrect. The concept of observer is irrelevant. Additionally, the very positing of an atheistic tribe requires circular logic. Your argument requires suspension of logic for it to stand . . . The very same patterns of illogical irrationality you ascribe to theists is required.
The words 'atheism' and 'atheist' are defined as the lack of theism. If there were no theism, the concept of atheism would wholly lack reference and much more likely would never exist. There would only be that which is . . . Which would be nothing, void, nada, less than zero . . .
@mdfisher272: All hail his noodly goodness!
Atheism is not a religion.
Proof:
Athesim would still exist (as a state of being) even if mankind never invented any of the sectartion beliefs we call religion.
Example:
Suppose we knew of an isolated group of humanity living on their own island away from any other human cultures. Further, assume that this tribe of humanity never conceptualized any beleif in any god or gods. This tribe would be accurately described as atheist. They would not be aware of the concept of atheism but that doesn't matter. We, the observers, recognize that state of being and can clearly delineate a culture living in that state of being.
Before anyone responds to this proof by saying "atheism doesn't exist as a concept to that tribe, therefore atheism doesn't exist": Just because you don't recognize the circumstances that you live in, doesn't mean that the circumstance doesn't exist. If I live in a fascist country but I am not aware that I live in a fascist country (through ignorance of the concept) it doesn't change that fact that I live in a fascist country.
If atheism can exist(as a state) without the existance of any religion, by definition, atheism is not a religion.
BTW. The example tribe above is also aspaghettimonsterist, acolonialist, and any number of other concepts they aren't aware of, prefixed with "a".
I stated that I am a atheist-leaning agnostic. I have no belief system as it pertains to religion. None. I said before, no doctrine, no "system," no dogma, no place of worship, no scripture, no appealing to a higher power, no prayer, not even bullet points. I simply find every religion I've ever heard of preposterous.
This argument is going nowhere because we are simply not using language in the same way.
If you belonged to no clubs: not the Rotary, not the Elks, not the Knights of Columbus, not the Moose Lodge, and I insisted that you still belonged to a club that wasn't a club. . .can you see how that might be exasperating?
@Jayro . . .
The lack of a deity, just like the presence of a deity, can not be proven. Both mental frameworks require an element of faith at their genesis.
One system requires rational logic to be applied to observable occurrences and tangible artifacts and/or objects. The other system requires irrational illogic to be applied to an invisible sky-wizard or some such other whatnot.
As the local raving atheistic Jew of the bunch, I feel the need to point out that the basic argument here is whether there is an entity in the mix. Standing astride both sides of the issue are Reconstructionists who define that entity as a body of concepts (including history, genetics, tradition, rites, yada-yada) sufficient to initiate action/behavior in a specific individual or group of individuals or a social unit or a society.
Under that umbrella, the concept of evangelical atheism exists as a religion. The concept of the lack of an entity is the object of worship.
@Jamie, as I said before, and repeat, your confusing the classification of religion with common forms of belief systems. Bald is a hair style, it just is. If your a mammal and have no hair on your head your hair style is bald (whether by choice or not). If your a reptile you don't have a hair style, if you're a bird you don't have a hair style. If your a sentient being and delcare a belief system, even if you believe there is nothing to believe in you have faith in nothing. It is quite possible for humans to have no religion though, young children and mentally deficient people who can't conceptualize abstract idea beliefs have no religion, though others may intiate them in theirs (such as parents baptizing a baby).
It seems that you can only conceptualize the word "religion" as pertaining to belief in a higher form of life. Yes religion more often than not does pertain to that, but the word is nothing but short hand for "what is your take on spiritual existance", if your take is there is no spiritual existance, then that is your take on it. Face it if you call yourself agnostic or athesist your identifying yourself in short hand what your take on spirituality is. Don't put more to the definition of religion than what it is, a basic (very basic) outline of what you believe.
Yes there are plenty of fanatical religious people out there, that feel other people must believe what they believe, and try to force their beliefs on others. Yes I understand you don't do that, nor do you think about your faith. But as I pointed out above sometimes people get initiated into a religion, prior to even being able to conceptualize what a belief is, and as they get older, they never think about their belief, never wonder, question or act in accordance to the religion. Those people are probably less religious than you, because they don't even think about it they just accept. But they still belong to belief system. If you were to ask them what they believed they could probably spit out mantra after mantra yet never be able to explain a one of them. However, its that's just a thought experiment, take it or leave it. Perhaps you were raised as an atheist and never thought about why, perhaps you don't have strong feelings about your faith in nothing... but then again if that was the case, why would you post an opinion on the subject. I would bet that at a point in your life you chose to reject what you were taught and instead followed what you reasoned to be true. You came to a point of personal enlightenment... what could be more religious than that? I don't know if I ever came across an atheist who didn't firmly believe in their conclusion, heck I would say most atheist's are devote and have unwavering faith... for after all it takes a lot of self realization to reject the majority, to stand in the minority and claim you know the reality of existence... like a profit in a dessert if you think about it.
Oh and if your not part of an unorganized religion (which I argue that agnostics and atheists are), then why the name Atheist, what does it pertain to then? Does it make you more comfortable to call it an anti-religion like matter has anti-matter? I don't think it makes much difference, the roots of the concepts are still the same.
N
THOM!!!! Wanna blow a gasket? The women as chattel movement gains a foothold. Rapturian ChristoFascists join their ideological brothers, the Taliban, in destroying the humanity of women.
http://www.alternet.org/story/149022/creepy_christian_patriarchy_movement_shackles_daughters_to_their_fathers_and_homes
If those in doubt spent time with trees, with ani-pals, with moss, with stars, with clouds, with rain, with sun... what doubt would be left? We never claim the right the name the unnameable. We respect the the ground of being as being beyond words. Why is this relevant? Because we, as humans, are in the middle of the process of redefining our lives as social beings in relationship to Life (to the Earth).... we are waking up to the fact that we are here -- we are alive for a very short time -- and the gift we have been given is this earth and the love we feel for it and for each other.
some people need to think less, and be aware -- be present to what is happening all around them -- more...
@BlueMark! THIS! "I-Don't-Care-ism" is precisely where I stand 99% of the time. It is only when these things come up on the radio, the teevee machine or the interwebs that I even think about where I fall on the religious scale.
One legal definition of religion is any sincerely held system of belief that occupies the place that is held by traditional religion. There are atheistic religions like some forms of Buddhism and Confucionism. Belief in non-existence is still a system of belief. Therefore, in my view, atheism occupies the same place as traditional religion - since it is a strongly held belief system. I-Don't-Care-ism on the other hand is not.
Thom -- your comments about mystics meant more to me than anything anyone has said in a hundred years. "Mysticism", for want of a better word, is a natural response to true awareness.
What Mystifies the millions of mystics who listen to you -- is how do you manage to be a mystic and still follow the clock enough to run your (powerful gift of a) show? ... We, your fellow mystics, are mystified -- and in awe --
and we say, over and over again;
Thank you.
I confess that my argument hasn't been developed over a long period of time so it's bound to be torn apart. Oh well,here we go.
If you look in Webster's Dictionary (webster.com) each definition of religion contains a reference to faith or God, with one exception. The exception is an archaic use (not included here) and is the only use that Thom could use in defense of his argument. I'm sure he isn't referring to the archaic use.
I'm paraphrasing here but Thom is saying that atheism is a religion because atheists proselytize their cause.
An atheist, or anyone for that matter, can proselytize without being religious. One of the definitions of proselytize is: to recruit someone to join one's party, institution or cause.
The cause doesn't have to be religious. Thom needs to rethink his definition and, as such, his position.
@maxrot, by your way of thinking, everything is a religion, and everyone has one. But as an agnostic (not a 100% atheist), I can honestly say that I have no religion.
If for you, lack of hair is a hairstyle, lack of belief in the supernatural is still a "supernatural belief", or if a word like "athiest" which means "lack of belief" is still a belief, as I said, we're not using language in the same way.
If it is possible for a person to have zero religion (and I believe it is), that is where I am. I trust you could understand why someone insisting that I'm religious just hits me as innacurate.
@Jamie, just because you don't spend time thinking about your faith doesn't mean you don't have it. Don't equate religion as believing in God, or gods or for that matter the supernatural or preternatural. That's not what makes a religion, true they present values, dogmas and disciplines, but all that it takes for a religion to be a religion is for a small group of people to share a set of beliefs. In the case of Atheism, that belief is that there are no superior beings or an afterlife. That's pretty much the dogma of Atheism, if you can't believe there are no superior beings or an afterlife, you cannot be an atheist. Whether or not you dwell on the dogma of your chosen religion or not is irrelevant. Go ahead find an atheist and tell them your an atheist that believes in a god, they'll tell you right then in there you aren't an atheist, your not part of the group, not part of the .... say it with me... religion. You claim Atheism, but then say its not a religion. Thats like picking up a stick and claiming its not an object, because it doesn't resemble a door knob.
N
One more thing, and I'll try to shut up. "Bald" does not equal either a hairstyle or a hair color. It is the lack of hair. It may be AKIN to a hair color or style, but it is not the same thing. Same with atheism/agnosticism as compared to religion. If you were filling out a form, you'd put it into the box marked "religion." But that doesn't make it a religion.
Being defined by what you are not is just irritating.
@Blue Mark: Obviously, my analogies are failing.
Put it this way. I used to believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and Jesus. One by one, I no longer believed in them. After I stopped, I devoted almost no time to thinking of any of them as real entities. I have no ongoing debate, I devote almost zero time to the subject out of arenas like this one. There is no dogma, no doctrine, no place of worship, do daily affirmation, no ANYTHING whatsoever related to my status as a non-believer. Some atheists may prostlytize, but I do not. I've got nothing to sell. Religion is simply absent from my life.
You wanting it to be so doesn't make it so. Is my lack of belief in all of the fictional entities at the top of this post still a "belief in the supernatural?" If you think so, then there can be no more explaining, because we're not using language in the same way.
Zero is a number
Bald is a hair style
Atheism is a belief system
@Maxrot again: And I put that wrong. I said my religion is a null state, and what I meant was, what Thom is calling a religion is a null state for me.
Thom is arguing semantics, and seems to think that prominant atheists speak for all non-believers. They don't. While I'd argue that even organized groups like American Atheists don't constitute a religion, individuals like me who focus about .3% on even pondering religious stuff in our lives certainly are not a religion.
Thom's a very smart guy. I don't know why he can't make room in his head for people who simply have no religion.
I know you don't have faith in God Jamie, what you have faith in is nothing. Heck your arguing for your faith. Its what you believe, whether you think about it or not (and there are a lot of followers of all religions that don't think about their faith, doesn't mean they don't claim their belief though).
N
@Maxrot, nope. Not really. I don't put any stock or any very hard thought into the origins of everything that is. It isn't my quest. My religion is a null state. I don't have "faith" that there is no god, it is simply a foreign concept that I barely ever think about unless it comes up as it did today on Thom's show. Maybe for other atheists it is different, but calling my lack of belief a "religion" is simply and totally not true.
It's almost like saying that if you never watch TV, that watching "nothing" is your favorite show.