Atheism is not a religion/ism/philosophy.

[VeganIncubus]

There are certain characteristics that make up a religion:

-Belief in god/gods or the supernatural.
-Sacred/Profane objects/times.
-Ritual acts.
-Moral code based on the mandates of said supernatural being/s.
-Prayer.
-A Worldview & Organization of One’s Life Based on the Worldview:

In all, if not most cases, atheists in the West do not adhere to any of these. There is not a god,or spirit whom atheists pray to or worship. Calling atheism a religion,when it is the lack thereof, would be like calling not playing sports a sport. Atheists, and I speak from experience, do not base their morals on any book or bible, merely on the notion that evolution has provided us with the sense of what is harmful to us and others.

--Some atheists tend to believe in alien theories, others do not.
--The philosophy(and by philosophy I don't mean an ideology that leads us or guides us) of atheism does not dictate people to abstain from things, to hold this and that day holy, or to hold this or that person as a prophet/messiah or to behave or talk a certain way, or to be arseholes,or constantly angry.
--We look up to certain minds, and we are concerned with the here and the now as well as the improvement of society and our culture from a purely humanistic/secular/scientific point,because to me...and to most of us, that is our sole reality.

----Hope I was able to clarify certain things.

Links:

http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/p/AtheismReligion.htm

http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutatheism/p/AtheismReligion.htm  

[Obscurus]

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.  

[Rsnbl Faith]

Actually atheism does fall under one of the definitions of religion: "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith."

Which atheism does fall under = P

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion  

[A Sojourner]

Thanks for creating this topic. I'll be bringing this up when one of my atheist friends try to argue religion with me again.  

[VeganIncubus]

RsnblFaith

Actually atheism does fall under one of the definitions of religion: "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith."

Which atheism does fall under = P

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

Faith requires no evidence. We are atheists because of the evidence we have for scientific claims. Namely experiments,data, tangible facts. Not just stories,miracles or pseudoscientific claims of healing and prayer.Or UFOs, ghosts....you name it.
Faith is a "nonrational belief in a proposition that is contrary to the sum of evidence for that belief." Faith usually denotes non-empirical statements and notions.
-- I go with the claim that has the more evidence on its side. Not the one I would like to be true because it feels nice.
--Science needs no 'faith' in the sense of religiosity or devotion. It explores claims and accepts doubt as a constant. Most of religion does not.  

[VeganIncubus]

Obscurus

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.

That,sir, is an unsupported claim. Do we need to believe in a god there is no evidence for? Do we go based on gut feeling or rather,on what we have seen of the world and studied thus far? --- the god holy books claim has not been proven to exist. We do not need to have faith in what we have examined and experimented with because we have given explanation to many events as well to our own behaviour, how it derives from natural selection and evolution, not creation or any kind of command by any higher power.
Show me anything besides a Bible passage or any Holy Book as evidence of a deity.

On you falls the responsibility of providing evidence for your claim.  

[Obscurus]

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.

That,sir, is an unsupported claim. Do we need to believe in a god there is no evidence for? Do we go based on gut feeling or rather,on what we have seen of the world and studied thus far? --- the god holy books claim has not been proven to exist. We do not need to have faith in what we have examined and experimented with because we have given explanation to many events as well to our own behaviour, how it derives from natural selection and evolution, not creation or any kind of command by any higher power.
Show me anything besides a Bible passage or any Holy Book as evidence of a deity.

On you falls the responsibility of providing evidence for your claim.

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.  

[VeganIncubus]

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.

That,sir, is an unsupported claim. Do we need to believe in a god there is no evidence for? Do we go based on gut feeling or rather,on what we have seen of the world and studied thus far? --- the god holy books claim has not been proven to exist. We do not need to have faith in what we have examined and experimented with because we have given explanation to many events as well to our own behaviour, how it derives from natural selection and evolution, not creation or any kind of command by any higher power.
Show me anything besides a Bible passage or any Holy Book as evidence of a deity.

On you falls the responsibility of providing evidence for your claim.

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.

We say there is not enough proof for the existence of a god. Whether it cannot be proven or disproven is irrelevant--- we just say that, in the absence of any factual ,systematic hard evidence, there is also no truth in the existence of fairies or spirits or monsters. It takes no faith whatsoever. On the contrary, it's like arriving to a very simple conclusion that there can be no such entities-- occam's razor. I needn't drill things into my head or seek proof, or bother myself with such ideas because it has no effect whatsoever upon my existence. I merely laugh at the concept of a creator.
We need not disprove it-- I personally just seek to live in a world where there is no need of a creator for it to exist, for us to be functional and happy.
Surrounded by people,not by shadows and constructs of the imagination,myths of great floods and monsters, UFOs, sirens,dragons...most likely the result of consciousness-altering substances than anything else. The question is rather irrelevant to me. I am just a total skeptic.  

[Obscurus]

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.

That,sir, is an unsupported claim. Do we need to believe in a god there is no evidence for? Do we go based on gut feeling or rather,on what we have seen of the world and studied thus far? --- the god holy books claim has not been proven to exist. We do not need to have faith in what we have examined and experimented with because we have given explanation to many events as well to our own behaviour, how it derives from natural selection and evolution, not creation or any kind of command by any higher power.
Show me anything besides a Bible passage or any Holy Book as evidence of a deity.

On you falls the responsibility of providing evidence for your claim.

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.

We say there is not enough proof for the existence of a god. Whether it cannot be proven or disproven is irrelevant--- we just say that, in the absence of any factual ,systematic hard evidence, there is also no truth in the existence of fairies or spirits or monsters. It takes no faith whatsoever. On the contrary, it's like arriving to a very simple conclusion that there can be no such entities-- occam's razor. I needn't drill things into my head or seek proof, or bother myself with such ideas because it has no effect whatsoever upon my existence. I merely laugh at the concept of a creator.
We need not disprove it-- I personally just seek to live in a world where there is no need of a creator for it to exist, for us to be functional and happy.
Surrounded by people,not by shadows and constructs of the imagination,myths of great floods and monsters, UFOs, sirens,dragons...most likely the result of consciousness-altering substances than anything else. The question is rather irrelevant to me. I am just a total skeptic.

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).  

[VeganIncubus]

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.

That,sir, is an unsupported claim. Do we need to believe in a god there is no evidence for? Do we go based on gut feeling or rather,on what we have seen of the world and studied thus far? --- the god holy books claim has not been proven to exist. We do not need to have faith in what we have examined and experimented with because we have given explanation to many events as well to our own behaviour, how it derives from natural selection and evolution, not creation or any kind of command by any higher power.
Show me anything besides a Bible passage or any Holy Book as evidence of a deity.

On you falls the responsibility of providing evidence for your claim.

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.

We say there is not enough proof for the existence of a god. Whether it cannot be proven or disproven is irrelevant--- we just say that, in the absence of any factual ,systematic hard evidence, there is also no truth in the existence of fairies or spirits or monsters. It takes no faith whatsoever. On the contrary, it's like arriving to a very simple conclusion that there can be no such entities-- occam's razor. I needn't drill things into my head or seek proof, or bother myself with such ideas because it has no effect whatsoever upon my existence. I merely laugh at the concept of a creator.
We need not disprove it-- I personally just seek to live in a world where there is no need of a creator for it to exist, for us to be functional and happy.
Surrounded by people,not by shadows and constructs of the imagination,myths of great floods and monsters, UFOs, sirens,dragons...most likely the result of consciousness-altering substances than anything else. The question is rather irrelevant to me. I am just a total skeptic.

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).

Um,agnostic atheism. Yeah, fact-based 'faith' ...not rapture fall-on-my-knees kind of faith.I trust my senses and my feelings-- as long as they are in accordance with reason. I trust things as long as they are in accordance with logic. I say one day we will be able to know whether there ever were gods or not--- call them aliens or whatever(according to some).  

[Obscurus]

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

While atheism is not a religion, it is a statement of faith.

That,sir, is an unsupported claim. Do we need to believe in a god there is no evidence for? Do we go based on gut feeling or rather,on what we have seen of the world and studied thus far? --- the god holy books claim has not been proven to exist. We do not need to have faith in what we have examined and experimented with because we have given explanation to many events as well to our own behaviour, how it derives from natural selection and evolution, not creation or any kind of command by any higher power.
Show me anything besides a Bible passage or any Holy Book as evidence of a deity.

On you falls the responsibility of providing evidence for your claim.

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.

We say there is not enough proof for the existence of a god. Whether it cannot be proven or disproven is irrelevant--- we just say that, in the absence of any factual ,systematic hard evidence, there is also no truth in the existence of fairies or spirits or monsters. It takes no faith whatsoever. On the contrary, it's like arriving to a very simple conclusion that there can be no such entities-- occam's razor. I needn't drill things into my head or seek proof, or bother myself with such ideas because it has no effect whatsoever upon my existence. I merely laugh at the concept of a creator.
We need not disprove it-- I personally just seek to live in a world where there is no need of a creator for it to exist, for us to be functional and happy.
Surrounded by people,not by shadows and constructs of the imagination,myths of great floods and monsters, UFOs, sirens,dragons...most likely the result of consciousness-altering substances than anything else. The question is rather irrelevant to me. I am just a total skeptic.

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).

Um,agnostic atheism. Yeah, fact-based 'faith' ...not rapture fall-on-my-knees kind of faith.I trust my senses and my feelings-- as long as they are in accordance with reason. I trust things as long as they are in accordance with logic. I say one day we will be able to know whether there ever were gods or not--- call them aliens or whatever(according to some).

I am increasingly of the opinion that the scientific paradigm is limited in such a way that there are some things we will never have concrete answers to. Time will tell on that.  

[VeganIncubus]

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.

We say there is not enough proof for the existence of a god. Whether it cannot be proven or disproven is irrelevant--- we just say that, in the absence of any factual ,systematic hard evidence, there is also no truth in the existence of fairies or spirits or monsters. It takes no faith whatsoever. On the contrary, it's like arriving to a very simple conclusion that there can be no such entities-- occam's razor. I needn't drill things into my head or seek proof, or bother myself with such ideas because it has no effect whatsoever upon my existence. I merely laugh at the concept of a creator.
We need not disprove it-- I personally just seek to live in a world where there is no need of a creator for it to exist, for us to be functional and happy.
Surrounded by people,not by shadows and constructs of the imagination,myths of great floods and monsters, UFOs, sirens,dragons...most likely the result of consciousness-altering substances than anything else. The question is rather irrelevant to me. I am just a total skeptic.

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).

Um,agnostic atheism. Yeah, fact-based 'faith' ...not rapture fall-on-my-knees kind of faith.I trust my senses and my feelings-- as long as they are in accordance with reason. I trust things as long as they are in accordance with logic. I say one day we will be able to know whether there ever were gods or not--- call them aliens or whatever(according to some).

I am increasingly of the opinion that the scientific paradigm is limited in such a way that there are some things we will never have concrete answers to. Time will tell on that.

I think you underestimate the scientific and rational mind.  

[Obscurus]

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

Unsupported? I thought it was self-evident. Atheists believe that there is no God or higher power or whatever you want to call it. It's a statement of faith. I'm not here to prove that there is a God; I'm only pointing out that atheism is a statement of faith as the existence of God cannot be disproven regardless of how unnecessary a Creator seems to be in the universe.

We say there is not enough proof for the existence of a god. Whether it cannot be proven or disproven is irrelevant--- we just say that, in the absence of any factual ,systematic hard evidence, there is also no truth in the existence of fairies or spirits or monsters. It takes no faith whatsoever. On the contrary, it's like arriving to a very simple conclusion that there can be no such entities-- occam's razor. I needn't drill things into my head or seek proof, or bother myself with such ideas because it has no effect whatsoever upon my existence. I merely laugh at the concept of a creator.
We need not disprove it-- I personally just seek to live in a world where there is no need of a creator for it to exist, for us to be functional and happy.
Surrounded by people,not by shadows and constructs of the imagination,myths of great floods and monsters, UFOs, sirens,dragons...most likely the result of consciousness-altering substances than anything else. The question is rather irrelevant to me. I am just a total skeptic.

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).

Um,agnostic atheism. Yeah, fact-based 'faith' ...not rapture fall-on-my-knees kind of faith.I trust my senses and my feelings-- as long as they are in accordance with reason. I trust things as long as they are in accordance with logic. I say one day we will be able to know whether there ever were gods or not--- call them aliens or whatever(according to some).

I am increasingly of the opinion that the scientific paradigm is limited in such a way that there are some things we will never have concrete answers to. Time will tell on that.

I think you underestimate the scientific and rational mind.

Possibly. However, throughout history science has encountered things that required a paradigm shift in scientific thought to allow for advancement. I also think that sometimes we forget that science is a tool and not an ideology. I would have more faith in science's ability to find answers if there were a totally unbiased way to apply science. Humans being a part of the process limits this.  

[VeganIncubus]

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).

Um,agnostic atheism. Yeah, fact-based 'faith' ...not rapture fall-on-my-knees kind of faith.I trust my senses and my feelings-- as long as they are in accordance with reason. I trust things as long as they are in accordance with logic. I say one day we will be able to know whether there ever were gods or not--- call them aliens or whatever(according to some).

I am increasingly of the opinion that the scientific paradigm is limited in such a way that there are some things we will never have concrete answers to. Time will tell on that.

I think you underestimate the scientific and rational mind.

Possibly. However, throughout history science has encountered things that required a paradigm shift in scientific thought to allow for advancement. I also think that sometimes we forget that science is a tool and not an ideology. I would have more faith in science's ability to find answers if there were a totally unbiased way to apply science. Humans being a part of the process limits this.

Science is a noble tool.  

[Obscurus]

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

XxrationalsexybitchxX

Obscurus

There is not enough proof for the existence of God for you to believe in God. Our entire existence is faith-based. Some beliefs just have more evidence than others. Some people put more faith in science than they put in what others say, their own feelings, their own senses, etc. It's all faith-based and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.

What you're describing seems more in accord with agnosticism. Atheists outright say that there is no God while agnostics admit that they don't know (and possibly cannot know).

Um,agnostic atheism. Yeah, fact-based 'faith' ...not rapture fall-on-my-knees kind of faith.I trust my senses and my feelings-- as long as they are in accordance with reason. I trust things as long as they are in accordance with logic. I say one day we will be able to know whether there ever were gods or not--- call them aliens or whatever(according to some).

I am increasingly of the opinion that the scientific paradigm is limited in such a way that there are some things we will never have concrete answers to. Time will tell on that.

I think you underestimate the scientific and rational mind.

Possibly. However, throughout history science has encountered things that required a paradigm shift in scientific thought to allow for advancement. I also think that sometimes we forget that science is a tool and not an ideology. I would have more faith in science's ability to find answers if there were a totally unbiased way to apply science. Humans being a part of the process limits this.

Science is a noble tool.

I'm not saying that it's not. I'm just saying that a tool is all that it is and it shouldn't become an ideology as some people make it out to be. I think that like any other tool it also has limits.