Many theists (Christians, in particular) often argue that atheism is a religion - that it requires as much faith as their own beliefs. That you have to take a leap of faith to believe in the absense of a god, much like they do to believe that one exists.
However, these people are wrong. Atheism is not a religion. Want to see why?
Say you’re an average Christian.
Do you believe in Santa Claus? I’m betting that you don’t.
Now, do you consider your non-belief in Santa a religion? Do you have two religions (Christianity and Santa-non-belief), then?
I’m sure you’re answering “of course not, that’s absurd, my lack of belief in Santa Claus is in no way a religion.”
So there. 
(This has already been mentioned in the myths about atheists comments, but I think it deserves a post of its own)
Oh, by the way, there’s now a part 2 as well. 
Related posts:
Subscribe to this blog
Erm, again, I have to disagree. Well, if I were to ask you what religion you belonged to, you would say something like, “I don’t believe in a god.” Well, that’s your religion, even if it is the lack of one.
Santa Claus isn’t a religion unless you worship him.
So “Joe”
What do Atheists worship? Nothing right? You just said yourself that because you don’t worship Santa Claus then it can’t be a religion. So therefore Atheism isn’t a religion according to your theory. Yet you say it is because??? Why exactly? I don’t really see an explanation. So you just have faith that it is and that other people shoud too? Ok then.
What I’m not getting is how you’re calling Santa a religion. Do you understand what religion is?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion
“in such belief and worship.”
Joe, that’s exactly my point: if you believed in Santa and worshipped him, it would be a religion to you.
Since you don’t, it’s not a religion for you. Non-belief is not a religion.
With atheists, it’s the same.
I have a problem with the latent hypocrisy of atheism. We claim to base our thoughts and understanding on logic and reason, the basic tenets of science, and at the same time say, “There is no god.” A basic principle of science is that nothing can be proven, only disproven. We do research to discover what does not occur and in doing so we rule out what is not happening, thus bringing us closer to understanding what is happening. We can never know what is happening. We must settle on theories, the mass accumulation of what is not happening around us. I have heard of no way to disprove the existence of god. There are theories that attempt a rational explanation of events that have been attributed to god, but even that can not disprove god’s actual existence. I prefer agnosticism, it allows a scientist to think with a clear conscience when it comes to the metaphysical and philosophical. Although I have also heard that an agnostic is just an atheist with no balls.
crumplestiltskin: that’s a bit offtopic for this post.
Please read my 2 entries, “The problem of agnosticism”, parts one and two, for my take on that.
But see, what I’m saying is, what would you say if someone asked your religion?
What would you say if you were bald and someone asked you your hair color?
Here is the definition of religion as stated by http://www.dictionary.com
re·li·gion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn)
n.
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
@ Pedro, why, I’d say the color of my eyebrows. The point is when it comes to religion, you don’t have an organised one, no, but you have a specific religion, Atheism. Just like me with Agnosticism.
firstly crumplestiltskin
if you asked a scientist wether it was possible for your hand to go through his desk
he would ponder for a minute if his mind wasnt already made up and say no
and even though it is technicially possible the probability of such a thing is unfathomable
so the answer is no
all science is based simply on probability
in chemestry there is never a single product from a reaction there are literially hundreds
but as many of them are so rare they are not recognised as being the product of that reaction
instead you are given only the most likely products. the same applies for all scientific fields.
now then joe
you are lost my friend
try reading what people are saying to you 1000 times and
maybe you can decode their so very cryptic lamens terms
peace
oh and inresponse to the actuall topic
both answers are “true”
if perhaps you were the only intelligent english speaking being on the planet
and you thought that Atheism was a religion how could you be wrong
the same for an athiest thinking it is not a religion he would also be right
words are words they are not truth or anything close to it
oh and inresponse to the actuall topic
both answers are “true”
if perhaps you were the only intelligent english speaking being on the planet
and you thought that Atheism was a religion how could you be wrong
the same for an athiest thinking it is not a religion he would also be right
words are words they are not truth or anything close to it
or in other words
if you called a dogs leg a tail how many legs would a dog have
four calling a tail a leg dosent make it one
damn stupid 56k
Atheism is not a religion. I don’t know why it’s so hard for people to understand that.
it is what it is
atheism is as much a “religion” as autism
First, the Santa Clause example is terrible, try a little harder next time.
Second, you are right, atheism is not a religion, it is a philosophy. Both these terms are very clearly defined and applied.
I didn’t realize this was such a mystery.
Lorne, I don’t think atheism is a philosophy, either. Or else, again (and no, it’s not a terrible example, you simply didn’t seem to understand my meaning), not believing that Santa exists would also be a philosophy.
It isn’t.
The Santa Clause example is terrible because believing in Santa Clause is not a religion. Therefore, not believing in Santa Clause is not a religion either. Seriously, find another example, this one doesn’t work. BTW, I understand your meaning perfectly, that’s how I know the example is crap.
Secondly, I’d love to hear your explanation of how atheism is not a philosophy. Let’s start with the definition of a philosophy (from answers.com):
1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.
3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
5. The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
6. The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
7. A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.
8. A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.
Atheism certainly appears to fit within those definitions. Although, I suppose if you were to be speaking of atheism as simply the non-belief of god then it would not be considered a philisophy.
However, I think that your website indicates that this belief is actually just the conclusion drawn from a larger “analysis” that you have taken. That is, it represents a “set of ideas” that you have logically concluded, and has given you a “system of values by which” you live. I think that your passion on this subject proves my point: it is a philosophy.
Lorne: atheism is simply the non-belief in a god or gods.
You said in another thread that simply believing in God is not a religion, and you may have a point there. However, if we say that belief in God is a religion, then belief in Santa is the same (the fact that much fewer people believe in Santa is irrelevant here). Non-belief in either, on the other hand, isn’t a religion.
The problem people (not necessarily you, your point seems to be different) have with the analogy is that they think belief in God is perfectly OK, and therefore non-belief requires faith, while Santa obviously doesn’t exist, and non-belief is also obvious, requiring no faith at all. What they don’t understand is that, to an atheist, both beliefs are equally valid - or, more precisely, invalid. It requires as much “faith” not to believe in one as in the other: none at all.
I think atheism would be better described as a world-view. A wordview is the framework through which an individual interprets the world and interacts in it. (wikipedia) Atheists view there world and interact with it in certain ways due to their belief in no God. In a similar way Christians view the world with respect to a existent God. Elivating atheism to the place of religion i would agree is a little much. A philosophy is a little closer but a worldview, i think, is most accurate. Everything and atheist believes must be explainable in nature and contain nothing supernatural. From that belief (framework)the atheist builds everything s/he believes.
However, to say atheism takes no faith is not true. Everyone has faith in something. For an oversimplified example: everyone generally walks on everyday surfaces without worrying if it will give way and theyll fall to thier death. They are putting faith in the floor. Now i know its faith based highly upon prior experience but, its still faith. Atheism puts faith in the human ability to reason and comprhend. Form this faith in human intelligence and our ability to comprehend therories are dervied that try to explain the origins of the universe and of life/humanity. No one has truly undeniably proven either of these. Believing something that isnt undeniable requires faith.
Atheism is not a religion but it does have some conotations that make it similar.
Lorne, might seem like atheism fits in that description of philosophy, but now you are generalizing. Most atheists might fit in that description, or their way of thinking atleast, but there are those that don’t think like that, and still are atheists. This is because atheism in itself is just simply the non-belief in god or gods, and as you said, that is not a philosophy.
And from my personal experience, I can say that this is the case with atheism. I have a friend I have had some great debates with, and the only thing we agree on, is that there is no god. We have argued about everything else, from politics and ethics to art, science and philosophy. We don’t look on anything from the same point of view, except that we are both atheists, and don’t believe in a god (or gods). Not all atheists think alike.
Very nice
Philosophy is my biggest hobby.
It would be a sweet job though.
And elinara you are very right in my opinion, but meh what do i know.
I cant even spell.
What I found interesting about the article “16 common myths about aetheists” is that you seem to be assuming that all Christians think alike and none have the intelligence to properly study and research their beliefs and the beliefs of others in the way you seem to think you have.
“Now, dear believer, ask yourself how many atheist books, magazines or essays you have read.” It’s part of the training. I’m not a minister or priest or imam or anything but I do know that to get to those positions you don’t just turn up and ask if you can do it, there’s years of training. I can’t speak for the U.S.A. but I know ministers here in the U.K. have often had to do a degree in theology to get their position. And that’s not just to say Christian theology, it all systems of belief (and non-belief).
“…a unified group, like a church.” um…have you looked outside the window lately? seen any news. Catholics and protestants have been blowing each other up for years but recently even factions within the same Churchs have been split over key issues.
Christians aren’t one big group, an authodox Greek Christian wouldn’t neccesarily ‘fit it’ with the views of say an Evangelical Baptist for example, neither would Anglicans for that matter, or Methodists etc. There are many types of Protestant Christianity and Catholic Christianity, in Ethiopia the Christian beliefs and rituals are almost indistinguishable from Judaism to the untrained eye.
Many intelligent level headed people have looked at the evidence and decided that they believe rather than dis-believe. It doesn’t make them less intelligent than you or less well read, it just means they have a different opinion.
fooboo: I never said all Christians are the same (the opposite is quite obvious, in fact), or that they all believe those things about atheists. But a lot of them do the latter, especially in more “evangelical” versions of Christianity. In Europe, for instance, I don’t think those myths are common at all.
As any fule kno: Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Ask yourself this:
If there where no atheists would there still be theists?
If there where no theists would there still be atheists?
I don’t believe in God but i see it unnecessary to call myself atheist.
Eh? If you don’t believe in any gods then by definition you are an atheist (whether you find it ‘necessary’ to call youself one or not). There are, unfortunately, lots of theists in the world and until they all see the light, the word “atheist” is a very useful shorthand for saying “I don’t believe in god. Any god.” What’s the big deal?
A lack of belief is not a religion. The example of having a lack of belief in Santa as not being a religion is actually a good one and can be applied to any religion/belief. If you lack a belief in Zeus or Jesus does that mean your lack of belief is a religion? No, not at all. Are babies religious? No. Yet they lack a belief in any gods as well.
The poor attempt of christors to claim atheism is a religion is a way to try to take the pressure off them to prove their stupid hateful religion. They can’t prove their religion because like all religions, it’s based on their faith of the ‘invisible’ and make believe, not fact.
Julie
I…I really can’t believe the utter ignorance by most of you.
Atheism isn’t a religion. Nor is it a Philosophy. Prove that is, as apparently the clear cut definition of Atheism, religion and philosophy are not enough for you. I see that quite a few have completely avoided stating their criteria that would classify Atheism as a religion or philosophy, please…post them, you’ll find your arguments quickly falling about.
But thanks to Lorne, it can fall apart anyway.
“1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.
3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
5. The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
6. The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
7. A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.
8. A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.”
1. Please, tell me where Atheism states to love and pursue wisdom by intellectual means and self-discipline? I can’t find anything, anywhere that states Atheists are required to do that to adhere to Atheism. Can you?
2. Please, tell me where Atheism requires Atheists to investigate the nature, causes, or principles, of reality, knowledge or values based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods? I cant that anywhere, can you?
3. Please, tell me where Atheism states that Atheism is a system of though based on or involving such inquiry? Can you, pretty please?
4. Please, tell me where Atheism states that Atheism is the critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs? Can you?
Hey, might as well cut it short right here, it’s the same for every one of those points. 5, 6, 7 and 8…please, tell me where Atheism states anything about those?
Atheism does not have a philosophy, individual Atheists CAN have personal philosophies, some may even attribute them or intertwine them with their Atheism, however that has no affect on what Atheism is, that is personal. It’s as idiotic as assuming every Fireman likes cheese because a large percentage, with no connection to each other in any way, like cheese. It is a logical fallacy and a failed argument.
Atheists can be religious, as shown by some Buddhist sects or Laveyan Satanism, but being an Atheist does not mean you are or have to be religious. Those Buddhist sects for example have nothing to do with Atheism, they just have no belief in God/s, thus qualifying them in the definition.
Atheists can have philosophies, many authors and political leaders throughout history can testify to this, but being an Atheist does not mean you have or have to have a philosophy. And as ive just shown, there is no “philosophy” connected to Atheism, it’s ignorant to claim Atheists have a philosophy because an individual Atheist does, it’s the same as claiming all those who do not believe in Santa like to drink water…because obviously its their lack of belief in Santa that is behind their like of the watery beverage.
As for the few who insist the Santa analogy isn’t valid, im afraid your sheer ignorance won’t save you.
The lack of belief of Santa is a correct analogy to the lack of belief of God/s. So many here have blatantly stated the EXACT reason why it is a correct analogy, then concluded that its not. Calling a spade a diamond, after describing a diamond the exact same as a spade, does not magically make it a diamond.
Believing Santa to exist is a belief, regardless of the evidence. Just believing God to exist is a belief. The belief of Santa existing is, in itself, NOT a religion. The belief of God, in itself, is NOT a religion. That is where the term Theism comes from, it is the opposite of Atheism, being a Theist does not mean they are religious, nor does it mean they are not religious.
Believing in Santa or God does also not mean you have a philosophy that ties into that belief.
With this…
The disbelief of Santa is NOT a belief, nor is it a philosophy. It is the LACK of belief, and has no philosophy that is needed to tie into it, not the belief that there is no Santa. Just as disbelief of God/s is NOT a belief, nor a philosophy.
If that is so hard for many of you to understand, then the problem lies with you and nobody else. Because you cannot mount an argument against it, and insist on providing logical fallacies to defend yours, does not suddenly make your argument valid.
Atheism is NOT a religion. Atheism is NOT a philosophy.
Deal with it or prove it wrong. The latter you cannot.