Atheism as a Religious Study

[tokenuser]

OK, controversial title, but for many years religious education has been taught in Australian schools to fulfill a sort of "ethics" requirement. When I was in Primary School (4-6) we had one session per week with the religious denomination you were affiliated with. Parents have the option of opting kids out of these sessions, and we would instead do homework or alternate teaching. IIRC I had one year of this, told my parents I thought it was terrible, and got opted out. And thus ended my religious education :)

Anyway, fast forward 20 odd years, and now we get this in Victoria (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24797483-421,00.html).

"Atheistical parents will be pleased to hear that humanistic courses of ethics will soon be available in some state schools," Victorian Humanist Society president Stephen Stuart said.

The society does not consider itself to be a religious organisation and believes ethics have "no necessary connection with religion".

Humanists believe people are responsible for their own destiny and reject the notion of a supernatural force or God.

Can I have a hallelujah or an amen? I hope that this form of teaching spreads to other states in Australia and gets picked up in the world in general. I hate the assumption that many people impose that because I do not go to church I am somehow less moral or ethical than they are. When I do something, it is not because it is God's Will, or because it is "the Christian thing to do" - I do it because it is the right thing to do.

[murphy1d]

So, I guess your prayers have come true? :D LOL

[ariastar]

The most ethical people I've known have been atheists or agnostics. They live their lives based on what's right BECAUSE it's right rather than out of fear of burning in hell. The reason one lives a certain way is as important as the way one lives.

[esophagus]

I don't see what there is to be studied in a religion course. Atheism isn't an organized religion, there are no real conventions to follow other than the lack of a god. I think it should be MENTIONED, so that people can understand that it is an option, and what that option is, but I don't really see how or why it should be studied.

[tokenuser]

I don't see what there is to be studied in a religion course. Atheism isn't an organized religion, there are no real conventions to follow other than the lack of a god. I think it should be MENTIONED, so that people can understand that it is an option, and what that option is, but I don't really see how or why it should be studied.

I think you miss the point. It is not that this is being taught by atheists as an alternative to religious teaching, but the fact that morals and ethics are being taught without a the backing of a fire and brimstone death as a deterrent to those who are unethical or immoral.

With society having its moral compass being set so heavily based on religious ideals, it is refreshing to see that it is being recognised that you do not need religion to be moral and ethical.

[esophagus]

I think you miss the point. It is not that this is being taught by atheists as an alternative to religious teaching, but the fact that morals and ethics are being taught without a the backing of a fire and brimstone death as a deterrent to those who are unethical or immoral.

With society having its moral compass being set so heavily based on religious ideals, it is refreshing to see that it is being recognised that you do not need religion to be moral and ethical.Perhaps the religious studies courses there are just different than the ones I take and have taken in the past. Generally, they spend a week or three discussing each major religion, it's practices, and its history. I'm saying I don't see how Atheism and it's ethics can have more than a passing mention in that setting.

Edit: Scratch what I said. Just read the full article. I get it now.

[tokenuser]

Perhaps the religious studies courses there are just different than the ones I take and have taken in the past. Generally, they spend a week or three discussing each major religion, it's practices, and its history. I'm saying I don't see how Atheism and it's ethics can have more than a passing mention in that setting.

Edit: Scratch what I said. Just read the full article. I get it now.Yeah, we are not talking comparative religion studies here (which I did enjoy as a section of a much larger course I took in high school), we are talking almost "Sunday School" type secular religion teaching. It was/is the governments lazy approach to ethics education.

[ariastar]

With society having its moral compass being set so heavily based on religious ideals, it is refreshing to see that it is being recognised that you do not need religion to be moral and ethical.

An old friend in high school told me she was a better person than me and more ethical because she went to church on Sundays. Let's ignore the fact that, while I wasn't a perfect angel, she did things I couldn't believe, from drugs in the park to sleeping with random people just to see if she would be lucky enough not to get a disease. I, on the other hand, volunteered as a candy striper, environmental cleanups, and was in a group that basically went around doing good deeds, from making ornaments for older people in retirement homes to gathering coats for poor people. But as long as she went to church, she was ethical and a better person. We stopped being friends after that.

[ariastar]

Yeah, we are not talking comparative religion studies here ...

You know where the only place I had instruction (outside of home) about other religions, as well as evolution and the big bang along side creation? The private Christian school I went to. No, we weren't told that others were going to hell. We were taught in a surprisingly unbiased way, and taught that faith has to come from within with knowledge of various beliefs rather than from ignorance by only knowing one way. That was a damned good Christian school, a damned good school period.

[phatlip12]

I don't understand. Whats the point? A class where you talk about what you don't believe in? It sounds like politically correct BS to me. Just do away with all of it. It all seems pointless to me (the religion studies too, but especially the atheists topic).

Comparative religious study I understand. This I don't.

[tokenuser]

I don't understand. Whats the point? A class where you talk about what you don't believe in? It sounds like politically correct BS to me. Just do away with all of it. It all seems pointless to me (the religion studies too, but especially the atheists topic).

Comparative religious study I understand. This I don't.No, not a class to talk about what you don't believe in. Its a class that teaches morals and ethics without a religious framework. Remember, this is the equivalent of elementary school (4-6), so its not going to go into deep philosophy. In the past, this sort of thing was taught under the guidance of religious teachers.

If "Christian's" can slip Intelligent Design into a science curriculum, I think its great that atheists can slip self guided morals and ethics that don't rely on fairy tales for reinforcement into an academic environment.

[esophagus]

Basically, I just don't see where Atheism comes into this. This is simply an Ethics class.

[phatlip12]

No, not a class to talk about what you don't believe in. Its a class that teaches morals and ethics without a religious framework. Remember, this is the equivalent of elementary school (4-6), so its not going to go into deep philosophy. In the past, this sort of thing was taught under the guidance of religious teachers.

If "Christian's" can slip Intelligent Design into a science curriculum, I think its great that atheists can slip self guided morals and ethics that don't rely on fairy tales for reinforcement into an academic environment.

It just seems excessive and unnecessary to me.

"Intelligent design" has no place in a science course. I'm sure this varies from state to state, but there was no mention of it when I was in high school.

I think a theology course is a good idea though. Comparative religious study so students can have a better understand of the worlds different cultures, and the effects of such religions on those cultures.

[comhcinc]

ethics need to be taught contsantly. bravo.

[emceeppantz]

I don't see what there is to be studied in a religion course. Atheism isn't an organized religion, there are no real conventions to follow other than the lack of a god. I think it should be MENTIONED, so that people can understand that it is an option, and what that option is, but I don't really see how or why it should be studied.

Isn't the lack of a belief in a deity a belief? What is a religion aside from a belief?

[darknessgp]

Basically, I just don't see where Atheism comes into this. This is simply an Ethics class.

I agree, though I'd add on I think they are making a big deal because Australia had been having all of their "ethics" classes being taught from the view point of each student's religion. Which isn't a bad thing, a person's religion can give them a lot of ethics to stand on. Though I'm wondering why they never taught this from a non-religious standpoint, but just because it doesn't have religious backing (or a specific religion basis) doesn't make it an atheist course.

[bigshotprof]

Isn't the lack of a belief in a deity a belief? What is a religion aside from a belief?

It's a belief; it isn't a system of beliefs like a religion. However, if you took the Atheist's position that there is no defining presence in the universe, you could have a great class on the "what now?" possibilities. If there is no "soul" where does self-awareness come from? If there is no guiding hand, what structure organizes the universe? Is mathematical certainty? an accident? the law of conservation of matter (I think that's it). There are some really good answers to these questions being tossed around right now.

[esophagus]

Isn't the lack of a belief in a deity a belief? What is a religion aside from a belief?I definitely think that Atheism is a valid religion, but I don't think it's a valid organized religion. The only thing that places every Atheist into the same category is the fact that none of them believe in a god. There's no real history or group of similarities that can be comparatively studied past that.

[phatlip12]

I definitely think that Atheism is a valid religion, but I don't think it's a valid organized religion. The only thing that places every Atheist into the same category is the fact that none of them believe in a god. There's no real history or group of similarities that can be comparatively studied past that.

Atheism isn't a religion. There's no belief in a higher power or being of a supernatural nature.

[emceeppantz]

that's a single, narrowed, definition. Often, it's from a much broader context of a system of beliefs or even a system of faith. Distill faith to it's definition, the belief in "something". It's easily construed as a religion.

Atheism isn't a religion. There's no belief in a higher power or being of a supernatural nature.

[phatlip12]

that's a single, narrowed, definition. Often, it's from a much broader context of a system of beliefs or even a system of faith. Distill faith to it's definition, the belief in "something". It's easily construed as a religion.

I disagree. In my opinion, religion and a belief aren't the same thing. I believe my grandfather is a good man, but is that a religion?

[esophagus]

My preferred definitions of religion:
Generally a belief in a deity and practice of worship, action, and/or thought related to that deity. Loosely, any specific system of code of ethics, values, and belief.
A person's beliefs concerning the existence and worship of a god or gods, and divine involvement in the universe and human life.Even by not believing in deities, Atheism involves beliefs about deities. Thus, I would consider it a religion.

[comhcinc]

well i guess a religion can be whatever you wanted it to be but i have never met an atheist that called it religion.

i guess sciencetology could fall in to catogry.

[skyz]

Isn't the lack of a belief in a deity a belief? What is a religion aside from a belief?

no it isn't because there is no 'faith' involved it is a matter of thought

faith by definition is irrational

ethics is very rational

you can have both but you don't need faith to be ethical

[emceeppantz]

what..? how is the difference between believing there is a god and believing there isn't a god at all different in the requisite faith of such a conviction?

Sure, I don't have a belief in a specific god, but that doesn't mean that belief lacks any effect on the rest of my life.

As for ethic, I never said anything to that discussion.
no it isn't because there is no 'faith' involved it is a matter of thought

faith by definition is irrational

ethics is very rational

you can have both but you don't need faith to be ethical

[phatlip12]

what..?

What don't you understand?

[emceeppantz]

religion and belief are synonyms.
I disagree. In my opinion, religion and a belief aren't the same thing. I believe my grandfather is a good man, but is that a religion?

[phatlip12]

religion and belief are synonyms.

I'm looking it up online just to double check, and all the definitions I'm find are saying otherwise. They all state the criteria of religion involves believing in a supernatural power or higher being. I'm just seeing no proof to back up what you're saying.

So you view me believing my grandfather is a good man as a religion?

[emceeppantz]

I'm looking it up online just to double check, and all the definitions I'm find are saying otherwise. They all state the criteria of religion involves believing in a supernatural power or higher being. I'm just seeing no proof to back up what you're saying.

So you view me believing my grandfather is a good man as a religion?

no, that's a single belief, unlike what I've said. I said atheism is a belief that structures a life -- a system of beliefs based on one. I could care less if you set up a religion based on believing your grandfather is a good man. Hell, what's christianity aside from believing jesus was a pretty good guy?

And yes, religion, belief and faith are all synonyms. My handy thesaurus told me so.

[alaskalonewolf]

Time for a better thesauri...

[phatlip12]

Time for a better thesauri...

I think so too. I looked on all the major dictionary/thesaurus sites and I'm still finding nothing.

[darknessgp]

no, that's a single belief, unlike what I've said. I said atheism is a belief that structures a life -- a system of beliefs based on one. I could care less if you set up a religion based on believing your grandfather is a good man. Hell, what's christianity aside from believing jesus was a pretty good guy?

And yes, religion, belief and faith are all synonyms. My handy thesaurus told me so.

Atheism isn't a system of beliefs. It is a single belief, that there is no supreme being(s). There is no teachings along with it, no organization for common practicing. If you still disagree, please back up your claims.

Oh, and just to clarify (i.e. I won't be responding to you on this issue if you post, so FYI) Christianity is not about believing Jesus was a pretty good guy. It's about believing that he came to die for our sins. Many people claim he was a good person, moral and ethical. That he helped people, though that leads to one big issue. He says he is the Son of God and the Savior. However, this means he's either a liar, crazy, or telling the truth. How can he be moral and a liar? That doesn't make sense. Perhaps he was crazy, but his teachings were good so if someone follows him and leads a good life, does it matter? If he is telling the truth, it is very important. It means that those who do not believe will go to hell. For me, I know that and it's the experiences that have really helped me make my decision.

[emceeppantz]

I seem to have struck a nerve here, not quite sure why, regardless. I'm not making any specific claim, I merely posited that atheism is as valid a belief system as any deitous religion (yea, i made up a word). At their core, there is a belief in fundamental truth -- god exists, god does not exist. To discount one over the other is to be closed minded, both inform and shape a great deal of thought in one's life. I'm not exactly sure where this campaign against someone's beliefs has come from, my belief is just as valid as yours.

I would disagree that atheism is not a system of beliefs. My statement was that I don't see a difference between the two, therefore I see no need for the definition of one as a religion and another not. I suppose the reverse is true, why call any of them a religion? Christianity (and yes, I'm well versed in the teachings, you don't get away with that growing up irish catholic) is the belief in a god and the associated son, simply. Everything else is baggage (to be blunt). So is it that religion has more than one (ie: 2) beliefs and atheism has one? What if I could conjure a second belief based on an atheistic view?

I always found that one bit about non-believers going to hell an interesting bit of christianity and a number of other religions. It makes dismissing others as heathens quite simple, no? No need to listen, no need to analyze their ideas/ideals, no need to stick around for a response. Just state your belief, call the other a fool and run. For what it's worth, I could care less what happens to you or anyone else beyond life, that's not my concern and it's certainly not my goal to tell you what I think is going to happen to you. If you get heaven or whatever you believe to be an afterlife, all the more power to you.

As for the use of humanism in ethics studies, I find no reason to discount it as a valid basis for ethical and moral studies, much for the same reasons I've outlined.
Atheism isn't a system of beliefs. It is a single belief, that there is no supreme being(s). There is no teachings along with it, no organization for common practicing. If you still disagree, please back up your claims.

Oh, and just to clarify (i.e. I won't be responding to you on this issue if you post, so FYI) Christianity is not about believing Jesus was a pretty good guy. It's about believing that he came to die for our sins. Many people claim he was a good person, moral and ethical. That he helped people, though that leads to one big issue. He says he is the Son of God and the Savior. However, this means he's either a liar, crazy, or telling the truth. How can he be moral and a liar? That doesn't make sense. Perhaps he was crazy, but his teachings were good so if someone follows him and leads a good life, does it matter? If he is telling the truth, it is very important. It means that those who do not believe will go to hell. For me, I know that and it's the experiences that have really helped me make my decision.

[emceeppantz]

my apologies, it's a "related word", but is that not nit-picking? religion, as defined by many here, is a set or series of beliefs, no? how does that make the two fundamentally different?
I think so too. I looked on all the major dictionary/thesaurus sites and I'm still finding nothing.

[phatlip12]

my apologies, it's a "related word", but is that not nit-picking? religion, as defined by many here, is a set or series of beliefs, no? how does that make the two fundamentally different?

Well, I'm not denying the too are similar. Just that they're not the same thing. Thats all.

[alaskalonewolf]

Ditto.

[skyz]

belief and lack of belief are not the same thing obviously

an analogy: hunger motivates you to satisfy your hunger it is active

a belief has to have an object it is also active

non hunger is a neutral state it requires no satisfaction it is inert

atheism is the lack of a belief in a god not a belief that there is no god

belief is active

non belief is inert or neutral

atheism is a neutral state

do you ever see people going around trying to convert people to atheism

anyone knock on your door or give you a pamphlet telling you that there will be some dreadful calamity if you believe

that you must stop believing to save yourself ?

[esophagus]

belief and lack of belief are not the same thing obviouslyAtheism is not really the lack of belief.

Theism: Belief in a god
Atheism: Belief there is no god.

Both are beliefs. I would even go so far as to say that both are a system of beliefs. I just don't believe that atheism is an organized system of beliefs in the way that Christianity and other major religions are.

[phatlip12]

do you ever see people going around trying to convert people to atheism

You obviously don't read Digg.

haha

:D

[emceeppantz]

completely agreed. I don't know if I would make organization a linchpin of the definition for religion, but yes, I have yet to see any organization to the atheistic belief. Either way, this is what I've been saying the whole time. To posit that a belief needs an object is false, it simply needs a conviction.
Atheism is not really the lack of belief.

Theism: Belief in a god
Atheism: Belief there is no god.

Both are beliefs. I would even go so far as to say that both are a system of beliefs. I just don't believe that atheism is an organized system of beliefs in the way that Christianity and other major religions are.

[skyz]

You obviously don't read Digg.

haha

:D

i used to actually read it daily but the comments are usually so repetitive

also btw having a philosophical argument about the exsistence of god does not require belief

to have a theological one though does require belief

[bigshotprof]

My preferred definitions of religion:

Even by not believing in deities, Atheism involves beliefs about deities. Thus, I would consider it a religion.

By that logic, Kevin Trudeau is a doctor.

[darknessgp]

By that logic, Kevin Trudeau is a doctor.

to be fair, he is. Though it depends on how you define doctor. If you mean in the sense of actually working in a hospital and practicing. We have laws and requirements set in place for that. But it hardly stops anyone from prescribing medicine or practicing their own medicine. They might run into legal issues, don't have credibility, and prescriptions will be ignored by pharmacies but that hardly says they aren't a doctor, at least in some form.

[alaskalonewolf]

You obviously don't read Digg (http://digg.com/search?section=all&s=atheism).

I agree. Atheism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism) is a religion all by itself. Somewhere between
Darwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism) and the belief that anything goes so long as it "feels" good.

[masherscf]

I think people mix up Atheism and Agnosticism. Science is based on observation. Since scientific instruments can't observe things that they aren't designed to observe, science is bound by natural laws. Therefore science is incapable of observing the supernatural.

Current models of cosmos don't deny the existence of a god, the simply don't require a god.

In short, god can't be confirmed or denied by a science bound by natural laws or a cosmological model that is irrelevant to god.

It can be argued that irrelevancy is a practical lack of existence. However, irrelevancy is not factual non-existence. And, if you belief in the existence of a god, that god may factually become relevant in your life in some capacity.

Therefore, any arguments about the existence of god based on irrelevancy are decidedly circular.

So, the belief in the non-existence of a god as an axiomatic choice and not on based on sound facts.

And, even if you don't believe in god, so many people do believe, that god is still relevant. The belief in a god informs the lives of many. It's not reasonable to dismiss these beliefs as ignorance or superstition since there is no sound basis for doing so other than an apparent inconsistency with a presumed axiom.