Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a human, I agree with your post. It's the caveats that are the problem.
If you look at the majority of the post in which people have declared their views, they predominantly proceed with requests and complaints about humans. "If all of them would do this, I wouldn't have to do that."
The article highlighted the difference between an atheist and a humanist. Some humanists are fixated on humans along with their non-belief.
The article is simply one person's opinion. If I was asked if I was an atheist or a humanistmy answer would differ depending on who and how the question was being asked. Regardless of my answer my dealings with others will be the same.
It is false to assume atheists do not consider humanity. Having read the article twice I do not find any evidence or study to back this person's claim. Being an atheist does not mean you do not care. It sort of like asking if you are a religious person or a kind one? Not mutually exclusive.
Not sure if I know any Atheists who are like the Atheists defined in that link. Atheism addresses one question whereas humanism describes how to view your life. Sort of like explaining the difference between a Boston Red Sox fan and ahelpful neighbour. Or the difference between a farmer and a father.
Yes, it appears to be an opinion piece misused to bash atheists. My analogy would be comparing not believing in Yetis with being an environmentalist.
As a human, I agree with your post. It's the caveats that are the problem.
If you look at the majority of the post in which people have declared their views, they predominantly proceed with requests and complaints about humans. "If all of them would do this, I wouldn't have to do that."
The article highlighted the difference between an atheist and a humanist. Some humanists are fixated on humans along with their non-belief.
I think the same can be said about people who believe in God. I don't know self-admitted atheists in real life. Therefore, they couldn't have had any real influence on my decision to stop believing. Instead, it was the perception of the lack of humanity from traditional institutions of religion that pushed me in this direction. If they could have their own ideas of what God wanted, then so could I.
My journey to unbelief is pretty much over and there is no fixation on it. Instead, I carry a theory of why humans believe in the first place and why others don't. My theory keeps me from reacting - keeps me a pretty good listener. My daughter is going through this journey and I mostly help her organize her thoughts rather than feed her the ideas. The generation of ideas is what makes her human. The focus is off me now and my belief or unbelief. It was this humanity that was lost to me as a child under religious influence. Part of that was because of lack of a good education on the adults in my life.
What type of atheism lacks concerns for the afterlife and fixates on humans? Perhaps the lines are blurry.
The main difference between humanism and atheism is their attitude towards life. While some individuals are both atheists and humanists, most lean more to one side than the other. An atheist simply doesn’t believe in a deity, whereas a humanist is more focused on the human experience than they are on thoughts about God (s).
Humanism Vs. Atheism | What’s The Difference? - CYBER ATEOS www.cyberateos.org/humanism-vs-atheism/
Hayle
If someone told you that they were an atheist would you therefore know if they did or did not
Have a profession or were n welfare
Vilunteered in a soup kitchen
Lived ir hated kittems oe puppies
Did fosteing of troubled teens
Drove a Fird F350
Member of a service group putting in tens of hours a week helping others
No you would not. You would only kbow that they lacked a belief in any gods. The author of that article assumes that if a person states that they are an atheist that they do not care about others.
I have never called myself a humannist because I do not like having to explain myself. I will admit to being an atheist ho wever I have fosteted troubled teens including 13 year old girls who were turning tricks , been involv ed in environmental groups for four decades and even did pet theraphy visiting pallative care in the local hospital. But ac coding to that article I do not care about other people. That articlr is a biased peice of crock that has no factual bases. Believe ir only if you wish to be wrong.
I think the same can be said about people who believe in God. I don't know self-admitted atheists in real life. Therefore, they couldn't have had any real influence on my decision to stop believing. Instead, it was the perception of the lack of humanity from traditional institutions of religion that pushed me in this direction. If they could have their own ideas of what God wanted, then so could I.
I've never understood why anyone would base their views on others' behaviors. I cringe when I hear people encourage others to behave in a certain manner in order to draw more people into their fold. Drunk drivers tend to follow tail lights.
Quote:
My journey to unbelief is pretty much over and there is no fixation on it. Instead, I carry a theory of why humans believe in the first place and why others don't. My theory keeps me from reacting - keeps me a pretty good listener. My daughter is going through this journey and I mostly help her organize her thoughts rather than feed her the ideas. The generation of ideas is what makes her human. The focus is off me now and my belief or unbelief. It was this humanity that was lost to me as a child under religious influence. Part of that was because of lack of a good education on the adults in my life.
My theory of how beliefs and non-belief are developed is that some are born that way and some are indoctrinated.
I've never understood why anyone would base their views on others' behaviors. I cringe when I hear people encourage others to behave in a certain manner in order to draw more people into their fold. Drunk drivers tend to follow tail lights.
My theory of how beliefs and non-belief are developed is that some are born that way and some are indoctrinated.
I would have a difficult time separating was is innate and what is taught and so avoid that approach of understanding. I think indoctrination happens because people learn something new through their own journey. Then they expect others to "get it" almost immediately. Kind of like jumping straight from crawling to running, with no opportunity to learn the steps between. Therefore, they may find their teachings questioned by others especially when it was only applicable to their environment.
I can come up with a number of hypotheses on this one. Certainly the growth of the internet, and access to information has to play a large role. The growing acceptance of science and that it shows the fantastic imagery that "holy books" describe just can't be. The growing awareness that we have only one life to live, and that there is no evidence of a god, gods, or an afterlife.
It will be interesting to see what they come up with.
I suspect it is in large part due to fundamentalism insisting that the wisdom parables are factual, rather than stories designed to assist a person in deepening their spiritual faith through contemplative study. Fundamentalism across all religions has been a problem on a global level across the modern religions. Lack of meaningful instruction and loving guidance has certainly made a large contribution to the denigration of religious study over the centuries.
I suspect it is in large part due to fundamentalism insisting that the wisdom parables are factual, rather than stories designed to assist a person in deepening their spiritual faith through contemplative study. Fundamentalism across all religions has been a problem on a global level across the modern religions.
Put another way, it is the rote learning of rule-sets rather than principles. Back when I was an evangelical we used to stye ourselves as under grace rather than "the law", and possessed of a "vital, living" faith rather than dead rituals -- and usually what we were comparing ourselves to was the staid mainline denominations (or what we fancied they were like at any rate). But the irony is that now that I'm on the outside, it is mainstream Christianity that, relatively speaking, has life and grace that I had been told we evangelicals had. And especially now that the best and brightest of the evangelical young I came of age with are now old like me, they are about the most dour, one-foot-in-front-of-the-other people you could imagine. Strangers in this world, holding on to the end, while being persecuted and put-upon and misunderstood. No hope or joy until the afterlife. What a waste.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LookinForMayberry
Lack of meaningful instruction and loving guidance has certainly made a large contribution to the denigration of religious study over the centuries.
You got that right. I wasn't exactly chafing at the bit to get out of the faith. If fundamentalism hadn't cranked my expectations up into the stratosphere, I might have found Christianity an adequate abstraction that didn't leak so much. But I'm lost to it now. And my story is certainly not unique, now, or throughout history.
Put another way, it is the rote learning of rule-sets rather than principles. Back when I was an evangelical we used to stye ourselves as under grace rather than "the law", and possessed of a "vital, living" faith rather than dead rituals -- and usually what we were comparing ourselves to was the staid mainline denominations (or what we fancied they were like at any rate). But the irony is that now that I'm on the outside, it is mainstream Christianity that, relatively speaking, has life and grace that I had been told we evangelicals had. And especially now that the best and brightest of the evangelical young I came of age with are now old like me, they are about the most dour, one-foot-in-front-of-the-other people you could imagine. Strangers in this world, holding on to the end, while being persecuted and put-upon and misunderstood. No hope or joy until the afterlife. What a waste.
You got that right. I wasn't exactly chafing at the bit to get out of the faith. If fundamentalism hadn't cranked my expectations up into the stratosphere, I might have found Christianity an adequate abstraction that didn't leak so much. But I'm lost to it now. And my story is certainly not unique, now, or throughout history.
It is hard to find that what you grew up with and loved has fallen out of grace, so to speak, but realize that the love in your heart remains -- and that is the true worship.
I can come up with a number of hypotheses on this one. Certainly the growth of the internet, and access to information has to play a large role. The growing acceptance of science and that it shows the fantastic imagery that "holy books" describe just can't be. The growing awareness that we have only one life to live, and that there is no evidence of a god, gods, or an afterlife.
It will be interesting to see what they come up with.
People will become more intelligent in the future, which has always been the hope and will have no need for fables. Facts and science will more and more replace the superstition and fiction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
