Originally posted by RJHindsDo you understand the difference between the word "many" and the word "all"? If so, you've just answered your own question.
Your statement:
"There is no overarching set of deeply held beliefs in common among atheists by virtue of which they're religious."
I don't believe your statement is accurate. How do you explain all of these atheist organizations if they have no commonly held beliefs specific to atheists?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Atheism_organizations
Also, on the view we're discussing, the beliefs that make one religious are the ones that are deeply held, of central importance, etc. Those are the beliefs that Kelly is talking about. Atheists are all atheists by virtue of their disbelief. On Kelly's view, they're religious by virtue of what they care deeply about. My claim is that there is nothing all atheists similarly care deeply about by virtue of which they are all religious. Got it? It's like if I said there's nothing that all baseball players have in common in virtue of which they're religious, and then you cited the Wikipedia page listing all the MLB teams. It's irrelevant, and indicates you're not following the discussion.
Originally posted by bbarrAtheists are atheists based on their beliefs. For example:
Do you understand the difference between the word "many" and the word "all"? If so, you've just answered your own question.
Also, on the view we're discussing, the beliefs that make one religious are the ones that are deeply held, of central importance, etc. Those are the beliefs that Kelly is talking about. Atheists are all atheists by virtue of their di the MLB teams. It's irrelevant, and indicates you're not following the discussion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists
It propagated atheism and scientific achievements, conducted 'individual work' (a method of sending atheist tutors to meet with individual believers to convince them of atheism, which could be followed up with public harassment if they failed to comply) with religious people, prepared propagandists and atheistic campaigners, published anti-religious scientific literature and periodicals, organized museums and exhibitions, conducted scientific research in the field of atheism and critics of religion. The League's slogan was "Struggle against religion is a struggle for socialism", which was meant to tie in their atheist views with economy, politics, and culture. One of the slogans adopted at the 2nd congress was "Struggle against religion is a struggle for the five year plan!" The League had international connections; it was part of the International of Proletarian Freethinkers and later of the Worldwide Freethinkers Union.
The League was a "nominally independent organization established by the Communist Party to promote atheism." It published newspapers, journals, and other materials that lampooned religion; it sponsored lectures and films; it organized demonstrations and parades; it set up antireligious museums; and it led a concerted effort telling Soviet citizens that religious beliefs and practices were "wrong" and "harmful", and that "good" citizens ought to embrace a scientific, atheistic worldview.
Originally posted by RJHindsRight, but on Kelly's view they are religious based on holding beliefs that are of central importance and deeply held. Kelly doesn't care about what makes atheists atheistic. He is talking about what makes atheists religious. We're talking about different sets of beliefs here. And not every atheist, or even most atheists, care deeply and profoundly about their atheism. This is what all the 'weak atheists' have been saying again and again. Heck, I am a strong atheist, I know that God doesn't exist, and I have the arguments. But I never really think about it, in the same way I don't think much about unicorns or goblins. It's just not relevant to my life and concerns. So, my atheism doesn't make me religious, on Kelly's view. But, presumably, my moral beliefs would because I hold them very deeply and they're of central importance to me.
Atheists are atheists based on their beliefs. For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists
Seriously, reflect on the baseball analogy above. You should see your mistake.
17 Nov 12
Originally posted by bbarrI am not concerned about what Kelly says. I am concerned about truth. The truth is that atheism is a religion by definition.
Right, but on Kelly's view they are religious based on holding beliefs that are of central importance and deeply held. Kelly doesn't care about what makes atheists atheistic. He is talking about what makes atheists religious. We're talking about different sets of beliefs here. And not every atheist, or even most atheists, care deeply and prof ...[text shortened]... e.
Seriously, reflect on the baseball analogy above. You should see your mistake.
17 Nov 12
Originally posted by RJHindsWe're not talking about this or that militant group. We're talking about the entire set of atheists. So, providing an example of one group of atheists is irrelevant.
Atheists are atheists based on their beliefs. For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists
It propagated atheism and scientific achievements, conducted 'individual work' (a method of sending atheist tutors to meet with individual believers to convince them of atheism, which could be followed up with public harassment if they f ...[text shortened]... ul", and that "good" citizens ought to embrace a scientific, atheistic worldview.
Suppose Kelly claimed that all baseball players were religious. And I said, OK, on your definition of 'religious' that's true, but not by virtue of being baseball players. All baseball players care about something or other very deeply; this one cares about beer, that one cares about cars, the other one cares about immigration policy. So they're religious on Kelly's view. But not all baseball players care deeply about playing baseball. It's not their identity as baseball players that makes them religious.
Now suppose you jumped into this discussion and said "Hey! Here's one baseball player that totally, deeply cares about baseball!"
Do you see how that would be irrelevant, and indicative of you not following along, and of not seeing that you can't conclude anything about an entire group based on one member of that group?
Originally posted by RJHindsYou can't handle the truth.
I am not concerned about what Kelly says. I am concerned about truth. The truth is that atheism is a religion by definition.
Anyway, I'm having a conversation with Kelly that concerns his view. The truth of the matter is this: Atheism is not a religion and atheists are not religious by definition. Some may hold certain beliefs religiously (in the metaphorical sense indicating ardor and incorrigibility), but not all do. That's the end of it.
Originally posted by bbarrWell, atheism does fit in the wikipedia definition of religion that I quoted earlier and the quotation about the League of Militant Atheists religious orgination proves my point for it actually mentions their attempt to convince others of their beliefs and tie in the atheist views with economy, politics, and culture to support their socialist wordview.
You can't handle the truth.
Anyway, I'm having a conversation with Kelly that concerns his view. The truth of the matter is this: Atheism is not a religion and atheists are not religious by definition. Some may hold certain beliefs religiously (in the metaphorical sense indicating ardor and incorrigibility), but not all do. That's the end of it.
I will leave you to debate your point with Kelly, now.
Originally posted by bbarrThis about people who hold beliefs! The fact we are talking about Atheist shows
But this account does not support the claim that atheism is a religion. If you're right, it only supports the claim that atheists are religious. Atheists have different sets of deeply held beliefs (some are progressive, some are conservative; some are Yankees fans, some are Red Sox fans). There is no overarching set of deeply held beliefs in common among at have to be like, on your view, to [b]not qualify as religious? Can you give an example?[/b]
that those that carry on about the lack of a God, god, or gods can do so and they
are by the definition I shared religious. I have also if you go back and read what
I have said you can also be religious about baseball, which does NOT make baseball
a religion.
The line is how deeply the beliefs about each subject are felt and acted upon as I
think about this, you can without a doubt a religious Atheist! Personally, I don't
see how you can define a group of people by shared views that are deeply held
and those beliefs, views, standards, are the only things that bind them into a group,
and not call what how they are defined religious.
Not everyone who plays baseball is religious about it, but everyone who calls
themselves Atheist cares enough about the details of that point of view they
want to be identified by that term. I think denial is what you are running into
here more than anything else and more than likely that is due to rejection of
any deity and the fact that religion plays such a heavy place in what the
Atheists are oppose to.
A side note I know people who believe in God that are NOT religious about it too.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayKelly, how many times does this have to be said?: Not all atheists care deeply about their atheism. So, on your own account, it follows that not all atheists are religious about their atheism. So, atheism may be a religious matter for some and not for others. But please note even this result is contingent upon granting your cherry-picked, non-standard and totally unacceptable reading of the term 'religious' (which I don't).
This about people who hold beliefs! The fact we are talking about Atheist shows
that those that carry on about the lack of a God, god, or gods can do so and they
are by the definition I shared religious. I have also if you go back and read what
I have said you can also be religious about baseball, which does NOT make baseball
a religion.
The line is .
A side note I know people who believe in God that are NOT religious about it too.
Kelly
17 Nov 12
Originally posted by bbarrI don't care that not all Atheist care deeply about Atheism, not all Theist care
Kelly, how many times does this have to be said?: Not all atheists care deeply about their atheism. So, on your own account, it follows that not all atheists are religious about their atheism. So, atheism may be a religious matter for some and not for others. But please note even this result is contingent upon granting your cherry-picked, non-standard and totally unacceptable reading of the term 'religious' (which I don't).
deeply about God, god, or gods too. I cheery picked a meaning that is valid,
we do that with all our data, people always put what they think is true up and
validate those things with the means they have at finger tips. You don't think
Atheist do the samething when they speak about God?
Kelly
17 Nov 12
Originally posted by KellyJayOK, so you agree that Atheism is not a religion, although some atheists are religious. Just like theism is not a religion, although some theists are religious. Good. Now will you promise not to say that Atheism is a religion? You can say that some particularly strident and ideological atheists hold their beliefs religiously, but you can't paint the entire group that way. For instance, I really don't care at all about atheism or theism in my day-to-day life. I pretty much only think about it when I'm teaching a class in philosophy of religion or an introduction to ethical theory (or when I'm on here). Entire months will go by when it never crosses my mind.
I don't care that not all Atheist care deeply about Atheism, not all Theist care
deeply about God, god, or gods too. I cheery picked a meaning that is valid,
we do that with all our data, people always put what they think is true up and
validate those things with the means they have at finger tips. You don't think
Atheist do the samething when they speak about God?
Kelly