Do atheists fancy themselves as nonconformists?

[Anonymous]

I also have to admit as I sit here thinking about this thread that the entire premise of op's question is faulty.

I don't believe. That is simply a description of my state of mind. It wasn't something I chose so much as something I admitted to myself and decided to be open about. How does one change a belief in something inherently unknowable? I think it would be as hard as asking some of you not to believe.

I can choose to eat broccoli but I can't choose to like broccoli. Belief in God its something similar. I could surround myself with religion and I could live a godly life and profess to believe. But I can't actually force that. I truly do not believe, I truly do not have faith. I don't think that faith or the lack thereof can be manufactured for any type of identity goal. At the end of the day you believe what you believe deep down in your soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also have to admit as I sit here thinking about this thread that the entire premise of op's question is faulty.

I don't believe. That is simply a description of my state of mind. It wasn't something I chose so much as something I admitted to myself and decided to be open about. How does one change a belief in something inherently unknowable? I think it would be as hard as asking some of you not to believe.

I can choose to eat broccoli but I can't choose to like broccoli. Belief in God its something similar. I could surround myself with religion and I could live a godly life and profess to believe. But I can't actually force that. I truly do not believe, I truly do not have faith. I don't think that faith or the lack thereof can be manufactured for any type of identity goal. At the end of the day you believe what you believe deep down in your soul.

Could you or would you be able to be honest with yourself about it though?

[Anonymous]

^17:19 again with the broccoli analogy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also have to admit as I sit here thinking about this thread that the entire premise of op's question is faulty.

I don't believe. That is simply a description of my state of mind. It wasn't something I chose so much as something I admitted to myself and decided to be open about. How does one change a belief in something inherently unknowable? I think it would be as hard as asking some of you not to believe.

I can choose to eat broccoli but I can't choose to like broccoli. Belief in God its something similar. I could surround myself with religion and I could live a godly life and profess to believe. But I can't actually force that. I truly do not believe, I truly do not have faith. I don't think that faith or the lack thereof can be manufactured for any type of identity goal. At the end of the day you believe what you believe deep down in your soul.

Could you or would you be able to be honest with yourself about it though?

I've spent a lot of time thinking about this so yes I think I know myself well on this front. And I had no desire to leave catholicism. I had a good experience in the church. I still like attending mass with my mom, it gives me a sense of peace. So I feel like I'm being pretty honest with myself. It would have been an easy and happy and simple choice to have kept on with it.

I find it a little strange that you want to immediately question my ability to know myself. You would fond it insulting I imagine if I questioned whether your faith in god was fully examined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would a believer ever decide to believe in order to conform? For a sense of belonging? Would a believer ever fancy himself important because he feels part of the might that comes with being in the majority?

I'm sure some theists do. I've heard similar criticisms of "lukewarm theists" from friends of who have left the church.

So maybe SOME atheists fancy themselves nonconformists. But we arent all the same.

Excellent question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would a believer ever decide to believe in order to conform? For a sense of belonging? Would a believer ever fancy himself important because he feels part of the might that comes with being in the majority?

I'm sure some theists do. I've heard similar criticisms of "lukewarm theists" from friends of who have left the church.

So maybe SOME atheists fancy themselves nonconformists. But we arent all the same.

Excellent question.

As a believer, I think this is a fair question. I agree that some believers conform, just as some atheists conform. Note that we're talking about subsets of both groups here, not broad generalizations about either group.

The odd thing is, you can't force either belief or disbelief. So this presumes both groups are faking it....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, anybody here could go through this thread and catalogue mean atheist behavior ranging from eye-rolls to calling religion a net negative influence on the world. I personally didn't think OP was that bad, maybe a little naive, but I'll defer to you because you say these these are your feelings.

But why bother, unless we're in some competition to feel the most victimized? That's certainly not something I care about. However, I do agree with others that some--not all!!!--atheists like to play the victim card.

The most interesting thing about this thread is that any anger at atheists hasn't been linked with lack of belief per se. Every single one of your quoted passages, as well as OP, refers to atheists' BEHAVIOR on DCUM and elsewhere. Something to chew on.

I'm sorry, but this is considered "mean behavior"? It's not a personal attack on anyone, just a PP sharing an observation/opinion.

I am the atheist PP who quoted all the religious PPs who I think have been jerks. I think that that was a mean comment by an atheist. There are ways to make that point that are less accusatory. To say that something people find as a cornerstone to their personal belief system has been bad for the world is not something that is going to make you any friends.

To the PP who responded to me. I find it difficult to swallow that posters like you are claiming that atheists love to play the victim card in a thread that was created by a religious person to mock atheists. It is not starting the discussion in fair play to criticize us, have atheists object to being criticized and then say they love playing the victim card. I would never have posted here had the OP not so dismissively and casually insulted people like me. There is a cruel streak in making fun of someone for getting bent about not liking being made fun of. That puts the atheist in an impossible situation. Defend myself and confirm that I am a whiny little victim or say nothing and let you rip on me?

But can a religious person let go of the emotion and try to understand the comment? Think of all of the wars/deaths associated with religion. How many lives have religions saved? Is that observation objectively that far off base?

I don't think there will ever be a meaningful exchange until people let go of the emotion and stop all of the attacks. And learn how to use the reply/quote function properly.

It's irrelevant how many wars and death an atheist might think is caused by the ills of religions. That's simply anti-religious political commentary. "Atheism" isn't political, according to the greek definition; it's simply absence of belief in a deity. A religious person who believes in God can oppose the harms of religion politically too.

If you don't believe in God, that lack of belief can't possibly be based on the fact that religion can cause a lot of misery in the world, because the existence of God or non-existence of God has absolutely nothing to do with whether a particular religion or religions cause misery in the world. Or good in the world.

That's the point. Those who strongly self-identify as "atheists" and publicly proclaim it aren't doing it because of a non belief in a deity. They're doing it because they're anti-religion, and the antagonism towards religion is a political position, not a metaphysical one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:17:19 - What are your thoughts on the OP's question? Are atheists non-conformists? Are you?

My thoughts are similar to the eye rollers post.

I'm kind of incredulous that people think that atheists are so shallow that something as important as the answer to the question "why are we here" could be reduced to something to make us feel 'cool' or unique.

I was raised catholic and am a philosophy major and have spent much of my life deeply examining these questions. It is difficult for me to be an atheist, it is disappointing to my family. I chose not to tell my grandparents because it would have broken their hearts. Why would I choose that to be non conformist?

I am am atheist because I don't believe. That's it.

As an atheist you are clearly non-conformist in relation to your Catholic upbringing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:17:19 - What are your thoughts on the OP's question? Are atheists non-conformists? Are you?

My thoughts are similar to the eye rollers post.

I'm kind of incredulous that people think that atheists are so shallow that something as important as the answer to the question "why are we here" could be reduced to something to make us feel 'cool' or unique.

I was raised catholic and am a philosophy major and have spent much of my life deeply examining these questions. It is difficult for me to be an atheist, it is disappointing to my family. I chose not to tell my grandparents because it would have broken their hearts. Why would I choose that to be non conformist?

I am am atheist because I don't believe. That's it.

As an atheist you are clearly non-conformist in relation to your Catholic upbringing.

By the technical definition of non conformity yes I did not conform to what was expected of me. The act was non conformity was not the motivation or goal in determining my belief system though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, anybody here could go through this thread and catalogue mean atheist behavior ranging from eye-rolls to calling religion a net negative influence on the world. I personally didn't think OP was that bad, maybe a little naive, but I'll defer to you because you say these these are your feelings.

But why bother, unless we're in some competition to feel the most victimized? That's certainly not something I care about. However, I do agree with others that some--not all!!!--atheists like to play the victim card.

The most interesting thing about this thread is that any anger at atheists hasn't been linked with lack of belief per se. Every single one of your quoted passages, as well as OP, refers to atheists' BEHAVIOR on DCUM and elsewhere. Something to chew on.

I'm sorry, but this is considered "mean behavior"? It's not a personal attack on anyone, just a PP sharing an observation/opinion.

I am the atheist PP who quoted all the religious PPs who I think have been jerks. I think that that was a mean comment by an atheist. There are ways to make that point that are less accusatory. To say that something people find as a cornerstone to their personal belief system has been bad for the world is not something that is going to make you any friends.

To the PP who responded to me. I find it difficult to swallow that posters like you are claiming that atheists love to play the victim card in a thread that was created by a religious person to mock atheists. It is not starting the discussion in fair play to criticize us, have atheists object to being criticized and then say they love playing the victim card. I would never have posted here had the OP not so dismissively and casually insulted people like me. There is a cruel streak in making fun of someone for getting bent about not liking being made fun of. That puts the atheist in an impossible situation. Defend myself and confirm that I am a whiny little victim or say nothing and let you rip on me?

But can a religious person let go of the emotion and try to understand the comment? Think of all of the wars/deaths associated with religion. How many lives have religions saved? Is that observation objectively that far off base?

I don't think there will ever be a meaningful exchange until people let go of the emotion and stop all of the attacks. And learn how to use the reply/quote function properly.

It's irrelevant how many wars and death an atheist might think is caused by the ills of religions. That's simply anti-religious political commentary. "Atheism" isn't political, according to the greek definition; it's simply absence of belief in a deity. A religious person who believes in God can oppose the harms of religion politically too.

If you don't believe in God, that lack of belief can't possibly be based on the fact that religion can cause a lot of misery in the world, because the existence of God or non-existence of God has absolutely nothing to do with whether a particular religion or religions cause misery in the world. Or good in the world.

That's the point. Those who strongly self-identify as "atheists" and publicly proclaim it aren't doing it because of a non belief in a deity. They're doing it because they're anti-religion, and the antagonism towards religion is a political position, not a metaphysical one.

You underestimate the amount of atheists who only proclaim their atheism when asked about their beliefs. Using the language that English provides to accurately describe their beliefs.

My lack of belief has nothing to do with what religious people do or do not do. I'm not anti religion politically or metaphysically. And I'm not that unusual, plenty of others like me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, anybody here could go through this thread and catalogue mean atheist behavior ranging from eye-rolls to calling religion a net negative influence on the world. I personally didn't think OP was that bad, maybe a little naive, but I'll defer to you because you say these these are your feelings.

But why bother, unless we're in some competition to feel the most victimized? That's certainly not something I care about. However, I do agree with others that some--not all!!!--atheists like to play the victim card.

The most interesting thing about this thread is that any anger at atheists hasn't been linked with lack of belief per se. Every single one of your quoted passages, as well as OP, refers to atheists' BEHAVIOR on DCUM and elsewhere. Something to chew on.

I'm sorry, but this is considered "mean behavior"? It's not a personal attack on anyone, just a PP sharing an observation/opinion.

I am the atheist PP who quoted all the religious PPs who I think have been jerks. I think that that was a mean comment by an atheist. There are ways to make that point that are less accusatory. To say that something people find as a cornerstone to their personal belief system has been bad for the world is not something that is going to make you any friends.

To the PP who responded to me. I find it difficult to swallow that posters like you are claiming that atheists love to play the victim card in a thread that was created by a religious person to mock atheists. It is not starting the discussion in fair play to criticize us, have atheists object to being criticized and then say they love playing the victim card. I would never have posted here had the OP not so dismissively and casually insulted people like me. There is a cruel streak in making fun of someone for getting bent about not liking being made fun of. That puts the atheist in an impossible situation. Defend myself and confirm that I am a whiny little victim or say nothing and let you rip on me?

But can a religious person let go of the emotion and try to understand the comment? Think of all of the wars/deaths associated with religion. How many lives have religions saved? Is that observation objectively that far off base?

I don't think there will ever be a meaningful exchange until people let go of the emotion and stop all of the attacks. And learn how to use the reply/quote function properly.

It's irrelevant how many wars and death an atheist might think is caused by the ills of religions. That's simply anti-religious political commentary. "Atheism" isn't political, according to the greek definition; it's simply absence of belief in a deity. A religious person who believes in God can oppose the harms of religion politically too.

If you don't believe in God, that lack of belief can't possibly be based on the fact that religion can cause a lot of misery in the world, because the existence of God or non-existence of God has absolutely nothing to do with whether a particular religion or religions cause misery in the world. Or good in the world.

That's the point. Those who strongly self-identify as "atheists" and publicly proclaim it aren't doing it because of a non belief in a deity. They're doing it because they're anti-religion, and the antagonism towards religion is a political position, not a metaphysical one.

Does it follow, then, that people who strongly identify as theists are anti-atheist? I would say some of them are, but that it is not an identifying characteristic of all theists. I'd say that many theists don't think much about atheists and when they do it's without strong emotions.

[Anonymous]

Atheists define themselves negatively, by what they don't believe in. It's inherently non-conformist. "This is what I do NOT believe in, my non belief is what defines me."

I'll bet there's lots of other things that atheists don't believe and do believe in, yet they choose to define themselves on not believing in god.

It's peculiar to define one's identity in the negative, but as one poster noted, he was raised Catholic, and he can't tell his grandparents about being an atheist. The atheism is perceived as a rejection of the Catholicism. I think most atheists who bother telling anyone about it are similar. On some level, they've all got an axe to grind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Atheists define themselves negatively, by what they don't believe in. It's inherently non-conformist. "This is what I do NOT believe in, my non belief is what defines me."

I'll bet there's lots of other things that atheists don't believe and do believe in, yet they choose to define themselves on not believing in god.

It's peculiar to define one's identity in the negative, but as one poster noted, he was raised Catholic, and he can't tell his grandparents about being an atheist. The atheism is perceived as a rejection of the Catholicism. I think most atheists who bother telling anyone about it are similar. On some level, they've all got an axe to grind.

And this sums it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Atheists define themselves negatively, by what they don't believe in. It's inherently non-conformist. "This is what I do NOT believe in, my non belief is what defines me."

I'll bet there's lots of other things that atheists don't believe and do believe in, yet they choose to define themselves on not believing in god.

It's peculiar to define one's identity in the negative, but as one poster noted, he was raised Catholic, and he can't tell his grandparents about being an atheist. The atheism is perceived as a rejection of the Catholicism. I think most atheists who bother telling anyone about it are similar. On some level, they've all got an axe to grind.

And this sums it up.

So what should I say when asked about my religion and religious beliefs? Seriously. I don't go around proselytizing atheism, I use it as a descriptor when my personal religious beliefs are asked about. Which is not often. As someone who grew up catholic, when I decided I wasn't catholic I wanted a term to describe myself as 'catholic' was really a part of my identity.

And I'm a woman. I'm not going to lie about what I believe to make the average Joe feel special if they ask me. And I'm not going to passively watch a thread where I'm being stereotyped as an angry obnoxious ahole with an axe to grind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Atheists define themselves negatively, by what they don't believe in. It's inherently non-conformist. "This is what I do NOT believe in, my non belief is what defines me."

I'll bet there's lots of other things that atheists don't believe and do believe in, yet they choose to define themselves on not believing in god.

It's peculiar to define one's identity in the negative, but as one poster noted, he was raised Catholic, and he can't tell his grandparents about being an atheist. The atheism is perceived as a rejection of the Catholicism. I think most atheists who bother telling anyone about it are similar. On some level, they've all got an axe to grind.

I actually share similar beliefs to most theists, with a small exception. I don't believe in all gods. You typically don't believe in most gods.

Do you define yourself by a belief that Hera and Zeus aren't gods?

My lack of belief really only comes up when someone pushes for info or on an anonymous forum. Religion doesn't make for great conversation.