Religion III: Skeptical Evangelism, Psychedelic Shamanism, and other Religions of Us Hairless Apes

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

yes they hold the exact same position on the existence of god(s). What one does or does not decide to do with their time doesn't change their atheism at all.

But it clearly changes their behavior towards those who disagree with them. Just like Christian Evangelicals.

[Gears of the Beast]

GotB,

But it clearly changes their behavior towards those who disagree with them. Just like Christian Evangelicals.

yes but unlike the evangelists, the atheist's changed behavior is not due to his religious beliefs or lack thereof, merely his personal preference about how he chooses to spend his time.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

The "why" is irrelevant the changed behavior is what creates the distinction not the rational for it.

[Gears of the Beast]

GotB,

The "why" is irrelevant the changed behavior is what creates the distinction not the rational for it.

It's relevant because it shows a clear distinction between atheism and religion and that sense and why I have a problem with your attempt to conflate the two,

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

It's relevant because it shows a clear distinction between atheism and religion and that sense and why I have a problem with your attempt to conflate the two

I've never attempted to claim nor am I attempting to imply that Atheism is a relgious belief. It's not. It is the lack of religious belief.

Nevertheless Atheists who seek to spread their Atheism and Athiests who are content in their belief are clearly distingishable one from the other. Hence, the distinction .

[Sci-2]

This strikes me as a little disingenuous, Sci, I repeatedly said "atheism and irreligiousness," and I don't see how you can have missed that except out of convenience to the point you wanted to make, which was that irreligiousness does not necessarily mean atheism, and which I addressed anyway.

Apologies, not my intention. Will go back and reread your replies.

[TrueMetis]

Probably atheists in the traditional sense. A traditional sense that is defined by the Christian god of course, but then that is the spectacle through which many of these discussions are shaped.

Even not in the Christian god sense, groups that worshipped animal spirits would be atheistic, as would ancestor worshippers by most definitions. Admittedly it's gotten a little muddled with some of the new pagan things going around like that whole "god is everything" weirdness.

There's also that religion doesn't automatically mean theist, so that Wells guy calling new atheism "quasi-religious" (even if I disagree with him there) like atheists have never been religious is fucking bizarre.

Also bizarre is that he thinks using the same basic activism techniques that every good group of activists use makes it religious, atheists aren't taking their ques from religion they're taking their ques from the civil rights movement and the LGBT movement.

[Gears of the Beast]

GotB,

I've never attempted to claim nor am I attempting to imply that Atheism is a relgious belief. It's not. It is the lack of religious belief.

Nevertheless Atheists who seek to spread their Atheism and Athiests who are content in their belief are clearly distingishable one from the other. Hence, the distinction .

But you're using the example of a Christian evangelical to make this point. The Christian evangelical isn't simply choosing to to conduct themself differently, they adhere to a different form of Christianity. This is not true of atheism, the position itself remains exactly the same, it's not a different version of atheism. That's the great thing about atheism, there are no sects or disagreements over doctrine because it's just one position. That's why the pizza analogy is still apt, sure the atheist who like pizza is distinguishable from the atheist that doesn't but actually atheism itself has nothing to do with pizza so the pizza thing is entirely irrelevant because atheists can differ on anything. That's why I said you're free to make the distinction, it's just a stupid one and antitheist label makes a lot more sense.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

The manner in which an Atheist will address people who disagrees with there disbelief varies depending upon where that disbeliever falls on the, for lack of a better term, "engagement spectrum". Like an evangelical Christian an evangelical Atheist is going to engage differently with someone who disagrees with their views. As I said before the "why" behind that is not relevant to this discussion. The manner of engagment is what distinguishes an evangelical Atheist from a non-evangelical Atheist and similar in manner of engagement to an evangelical Christian.

You are deliberately ignoring that fact. Just admit that there are different flavors of Atheism based upon what the given disbeliever does with their disbelief.

[Gears of the Beast]

You are deliberately ignoring that fact. Just admit that there are different flavors of Atheism based upon what the given disbeliever does with their disbelief.

I'll "admit" that if you admit there's different flavours of atheism based upon literally everything. If you're not willing to "admit" that then no, then I revert back to the fact that the atheism isn't the independent variable here, the atheism does not change.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

I'll admit that you can make further distinctions but that the vast majority of those distinctions are irrelevant to this discussion (like your pizza example) unlike where an Atheist will fall on the engagement spectrum.

[Gears of the Beast]

GotB,

I'll admit that you can make further distinctions but that the vast majority of those distinctions are irrelevant to this discussion (like your pizza example) unlike where an Atheist will fall on the engagement spectrum.

No. The "engagement spectrum" is the distinction that you're trying to apply, pizza would be a separate distinction applied to atheists, not in relation to your proposed "engagement spectrum". The point is you can apply these arbitrary distinctions but the atheism is not the independent variable, it's the individual's personal preference. Which is why I'd prefer "antitheist", because it does not imply a difference to the person's actual atheism.