Before I start, I'll try to explain what I'm considering to be lower-case atheism because I don't think we ever clearly defined that. I guess I see lower-case atheists as people who don't believe in God but don't think of their atheism as a religion. They have the belief in no god (which is, after all, what "atheism" means, as Ted pointed out in class), but they don't consciously base their actions or life on that belief like a religious person would apply his/her beliefs into a religious frame of reference. This is almost like agnosticism (like Emily S. noted), but the difference is that these atheists don't believe they can't know if there's a god; they believe they know there is no god even though they don't elevate this belief/knowledge into anything more than just one fact among many. Basically, atheists believe what agnostics don't, but neither of them imparts any special significance on that belief or lack thereof. And all this is in contrast to upper-case Atheists who, like Catrina, find mystical significance in believing in no god.
And as to what religion itself is, I've found a few different definitions of religion in these blogs:
- Daniel- "the definition of religion is beyond being something tangible." "It is an abstract label for culture." "Religion is a wrapper for cultural objects to make them more 'user friendly.'" "Religion is...a way of gaining truths." (Note: this last one came from an earlier post.)
- Oliver- "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)."
- Alex (in comment to Oliver's post)- "A religion by definition is the set of ideals that a person lives his/her life by."
And in class, we seemed to define religion vaguely as an all-encompassing frame with which to view the world which involves 1) meaning creation, 2) social cohesion, 3) identity, and 4) spiritual experience.
So... Oliver's and Alex's definitions seem to fit in with our class definition of an ultimate reference frame, but Daniel's is a little different. He seems to see religion as completely intertwined with culture so that as a reference frame, it depends a lot on other aspects of culture and isn't a frame in itself. (At least, that's how I interpret it.) Sarah M. discusses a similar idea in her post, suggesting that the so-called "half-assed" believers in any religion can share their ultimate frame with other things--these things being secular parts of the culture. This would mean that their actual religion is a combination of their nominal religion and their secular idealism.
Sarah also gives some possible reference frames that lower-case atheists might have instead of Atheism--such frames as environmentalism, capitalism, and secular humanism. Because their belief in no god is not important enough to them to qualify as a refrence frame, lower-case atheists need to have something else "properly ultimate," in Sarah's words, to shape their views of life and the world. In this view, lower-case atheism would not qualify as a religion because it lacks that importance in people's lives.
However, even if lower-case atheism in itself is not a religion, it does open the door to other religions (the aforementioned environmentalism, etc., as well as philosophies like Ayn Rand's objectivism and other variations of humanism that take on religious significance for their followers). In class, we seemed to be talking a lot about how science takes the place of religion for Atheists, but I agree with Daniel that science isn't the only form of Atheism. I wouldn't go so far as to agree that "science has no special tie to atheism whatsoever," however, because science and rationalism had such a huge influence on the rise of Atheism and many Atheists cite science as one of their main objections to religion. But I do agree that it's a mistake to think that science is the only difference between Atheism and [other] religions. We established in class that members of almost all religious groups accept scientific theories as part of their worldview (though, of course, partly influenced by their religious frames).
What I'd like to say is that lower-case atheism in itself is not a religion, but because it displaces all theistic religions by definition, it needs to have some other reference frame (unless we've decided that it's possible to live without one, which I personally doubt...). And this reference frame, though it may not be consciously grounded in the belief that there is no god, will have to be influenced by that belief because it naturally has to fit in with that belief to be accepted. In other words, their reference frame is a combination of their atheism and whatever other secular element of society they find particularly important. This is basically the same description as I gave of "half-assed" religious believers, so does that mean I think lower-cased atheists are just "half-assed" Atheists? I think the difference is that Atheism/atheism is so varied in its belief system as opposed to organized religions with their specific doctrines that atheism is more of a different sect than it is a different level of commitment. Atheism could be to lower-case atheism what Catholicism is to Non-denominational Christianity. In both cases, the members of both groups are equally committed to what they each believe; it's just the beliefs that differ. Atheists believe that the fact that God doesn't exist means certain things that lower-case atheists don't believe (i.e. the mysticism and greater significance).
I think that's all I have to say. I'm sorry it turned out so long. :( But thank you if you read the whole thing! ;)
3 comments:
Wow, that was really organized, and also interesting!
Very interesting..
Just a couple of notes: among certain strands of Judaism there is no problem being an atheist. I have met people who would call themselves atheists but who would also strongly align themselves with Judaism. So little-a atheism does not necessarily knock you out of a regular religious frame.
Second, I think you could include various "isms" that more or less take the place of religion. I can think right away of communism or objectivism.. both are ultimate frames within which a little-a atheist would be comfortable. But the frame is not atheism.. atheism just happens to go along with these points of view.
OK.. just thought I would throw something in..
That's really interesting about the Jewish atheists. But I think my point is that lower-case atheism is a conglomeration of many other "isms" which have as part of their belief system the idea that there is no god. And although they're by no means all the same, they have in common the fact that one PART of their frame is atheism. Here, the Non-denominational Christianity example seems to fit well. These people identify themselves in the larger group of Christianity but have a much less defined set of beliefs than other Christian sects.
Post a Comment