Wednesday's discussion on the merits of Atheism as a Religion really caught my attention. I saw that, in the discussion, most people were willing to accept that not all atheists have the same set of beliefs or believe things to the same extent. This fact was used to assert that not all atheism can be labeled religion (the example of lower-case and upper-case atheism was used to represent the different groups).
Like in several other class discussions, we seem to refuse to allow the same flexibility to more mainstream religions (i.e. Christianity) that we have applied to Atheism. There are Christians who do not use Christianity as their outlet for community belonging, or that don't see Christianity as their primary identity--does this mean that there is an upper and lower case Christianity? Does that even make sense to say that an belief system is no longer a religion once it is rivaled in any individuals mind?
I would argue that, while (using the arch illustration that was used in class) religion may be the largest arch for any given individual, that is not its definition. Religion is a belief system that is meant to be applied to daily living and allows individuals to share in a common bond (of varying strengths). I believe that Atheism in any form is as much a Religion as Christianity, Islam, or any thing else that is viewed as religion in society today.
Just a quick side note: The assertion that was made in class today that all scientific theories are proven--besides the obvious contradiction within the sentence (theories/proven)--is completely ridiculous. While there is more evidence for some than others, there is no way to prove the origin of the universe or the existence/lack of existence of God. The fact that we are wired to believe (as we read in the Why We Believe article), it seems that it would take a greater step of faith the believe that there is no God.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
just a quick defense of science: we didn't say that all theories have been proven, that's ridiculous. But some have been, making them fact. See my blog for a further discussion
No, scientific theories are not proven, they can only be disproven or supported. They are supported by evidence through experimentation by many different groups of qualified scientists to be as objective as possible. In addition, any finding that is published in a scientific journal is peer evaluated to maintain the objectivity of the results. Therefore change in thinking in the scientific world is a very controlled process. However, any theory believed today as fact could conceivably be disproven or modified in the future in light of new results and conclusions from research. No theory is absolute.
On a different note, I agree with Oliver that Atheism with a capital letter is a religion of its own. Just because someone does not believe in God as a part of their religion does not mean that their religion is not one. A religion by definition is the set of ideals that a person lives his/her life by. Therefore any set of ideals designed to govern how a person lives, no matter how ridiculous, could be considered a religion.
Post a Comment