Antitheism

[bluehillside Retd.]

The term "antitheism" is used here fairly often, albeit mistakenly. Antitheism is the opposition to gods, generally on the basis that they (or belief in them) is thought to be positively harmful. In principle therefore it's possible to be both a theist and an antitheist - ie, you think there to be a god (or gods) but would really prefer it/them not be real, or for people who do think them to be real not to practice their religions.

So far as I recall though there rarely if ever has been a thread promoting antitheism on this mb, and while some atheists here may also happen to be antitheists (I am for example) our antitheism is no more relevant to arguments of fact than, say, our stamp collecting habits. 

In other words we have basic category error here. Theism/atheism concerns whether the claimed facts about gods are true or not; antitheism on the other hand concerns whether some want those claimed facts to be true or not.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The term "antitheism" is used here fairly often, albeit mistakenly.

Yes I understand there is similar misuse of the word crap where some people are using it as synonymous to ordure rather than its real meaning of magnificent atheistic writing.

[Nearly Sane]

Why is this on the Christian board?

[SusanDoris]

I think I have to count myself as a definite anti-theist, but bearing in mind the many thousands of years that theism has been, and still is, around, there is little of practical use that I can do except to post here and there and belong to the BHA and NSS.

[Nearly Sane]

The whole idea that theism is somehow a cause rather than simply an effect by anyone who is atheist to be simply bizarre. If there is no god then it's simply a manifestation of our natures, and one based on a number of things that are useful to us. Removing whatever it is about us that causes it would change us to such an extent that we could have no idea of the outcome.

[Hope]

I think I have to count myself as a definite anti-theist, but bearing in mind the many thousands of years that theism has been, and still is, around, there is little of practical use that I can do except to post here and there and belong to the BHA and NSS.

How will membership of those two organisations help, Susan?  If the weight of history is as overpowering as you seem to imply, won't they go the same way as other atheist organisations have down the centuries?   

[Shaker]

How will membership of those two organisations help, Susan?  If the weight of history is as overpowering as you seem to imply, won't they go the same way as other atheist organisations have down the centuries?   

What atheist organisations have there been down the centuries, precisely?

[Brownie]

Antitheism seems very strident.  Why can't people just not believe?  No-one would bother them in this day and age.  On here maybe but not in real life.
(BHA is also the British Homeopathic Association, I was on their site today.  Just looking.)

I knew a very nice lady who was a prominent humanist when I was a teenager, she may be still alive but she was a good twenty years older than me then.  She was very active in the peace movement - Barbara Smoker.

[Shaker]

Antitheism seems very strident.  Why can't people just not believe?

That would be fine but for the fact that religion can be entwined in politics - to the extent of being an established state church, sometimes - and some religious adherents seek to impose their beliefs on others via the law. Any 'stridency' is simply other people objecting to that.

P.S. Barbara Smoker is still alive I believe at 93.

[floo]

Antitheism seems very strident.  Why can't people just not believe?  No-one would bother them in this day and age.  On here maybe but not in real life.
(BHA is also the British Homeopathic Association, I was on their site today.  Just looking.)

I knew a very nice lady who was a prominent humanist when I was a teenager, she may be still alive but she was a good twenty years older than me then.  She was very active in the peace movement - Barbara Smoker.

I have just looked her up, having never heard of her, the peace movement not being my thing. She is 92 and still alive.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What atheist organisations have there been down the centuries, precisely?

The Hellfire club?

[Brownie]

That would be fine but for the fact that religion can be entwined in politics - to the extent of being an established state church, sometimes - and some religious adherents seek to impose their beliefs on others via the law. Any 'stridency' is simply other people objecting to that.

P.S. Barbara Smoker is still alive I believe at 93.

Bless, she was very well respected, I suppose she still is.  She came from a strong Catholic background and wanted to be a nun when she left school but her mother said she needed to wait a while to be sure so she joined the Navy.  One of ten children, one of whom did become a nun.  It figures.

She was older than I thought when I was 15/16.

I know all about the established church, funnily enough I was watching something on TV earlier about the strong influence it had in earlier times when Cosmo Lang was AofC and Edward Vlll was wanting to marry a divorcee.

I can't see it lasting though Shaker and Prince Charles has always said he wants disestablishment. His heir and daughter-in-law will be modern Anglicans I think.  I am in favour of disestablishment too, I don't believe there needs to be an official church but I do like quite a lot about the CofE.  So we shall see.

[SusanDoris]

Antitheism seems very strident.  Why can't people just not believe?  No-one would bother them in this day and age.  On here maybe but not in real life.

Are you happy, then, for generations of children to be taught that something, which is entirely without objective evidence, is true?

[Nearly Sane]

Are you happy, then, for generations of children to be taught that something, which is entirely without objective evidence, is true?

Morals are without objective evidence, should we not teach morals to children?

[SusanDoris]

I was of course referring to a god of any sort!

[Brownie]

Are you happy, then, for generations of children to be taught that something, which is entirely without objective evidence, is true?

Children are not taught that now Susan, certainly won't be in the future.  Apparently Religion and Ethics is the subject now, not RE like we had (or I had).  Optional too, no two compulsory sessions a week.  I'd have really loved that but not to worry, I can discuss on here.

[Nearly Sane]

Children are not taught that now Susan, certainly won't be in the future.  Apparently Religion and Ethics is the subject now, not RE like we had (or I had).  Optional too, no two compulsory sessions a week.  I'd have really loved that but not to worry, I can discuss on here.

Except they are in certain schools.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Brownie,

Antitheism seems very strident.  Why can't people just not believe?  No-one would bother them in this day and age.  On here maybe but not in real life.

Short answer (as given by Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens I think): 9/11.

Longer answer - for the most part, if the religions treated their opinions as personal and their organisations as private members clubs, most atheists I think wouldn't bother with them at all, any more than any of us do with the flat earth society. The problem though comes when the religious park their tanks on the lawns of the rest of us and arrogate to themselves rights and privileges because of the personal faiths. And it's that behaviour for the most part that sparks antitheism.

Of course misdescribing atheist argument as antitheist argument here is just a category error as I explained in the OP, but there it is nonetheless.

[ippy]

Children are not taught that now Susan, certainly won't be in the future.  Apparently Religion and Ethics is the subject now, not RE like we had (or I had).  Optional too, no two compulsory sessions a week.  I'd have really loved that but not to worry, I can discuss on here.

If there is a lesson in schools specifically referring to religion as per the first word of the title Religious Education, it automatically affords undue importance to the subject, 'religion', how would you like to see  U E 'unionism Education' as a singled out subject? 

Unionism is probably more important than religion but it still shouldn't be given any sort of privileged place anywhere in the school curriculum, perhaps teach how to think for yourselves combined with the humanities.

ippy   

[Maeght]

Antitheism seems very strident.  Why can't people just not believe?

Many people do. I tend to think that if it wasn't religion human nature would find something else as justification for harm, control and all the things which antitheists seem unhappy about.

[Nearly Sane]

Many people do. I tend to think that if it wasn't religion human nature would find something else as justification for harm, control and all the things which antitheists seem unhappy about.

We already do. It's why the Steven Weinberg quote about it taking religion to make good people do evi has always been nonsense.

[Brownie]

Except they are in certain schools.

Faith schools.  Yet state faith schools now have to take people of different or no faith, so I am told.  People seem to jump through hoops to get their kids into them too.

The Orthodox Jewish schools remain Orthodox Jewish, no-one changes them or complains about them even though their standard of general education is quite poor, especially for the boys whose main focus is Torah and Talmud.  The girls do a bit better.

There's an Islamic college near me, set back in the woods.  It's been there for years but is unobtrusive.  I wonder what they teach?  It's only for boys I think.

Here it is:  http://www.educationbase.co.uk/Darul-Uloom-London-Islamic-School-Chislehurst,CC1802

Daily Mail article (I didn't know they did such a long day, flipping heck):
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288053/Inside-Muslim-Eton-Their-day-starts-3-45am-goes-disciplined-20-hours-Their-aim-produce-Muslim-elite-leaders-.html

I really didn't know it was so elite and so strict.  Sometimes you see the boys going to the shops in the village but the building is way back from the road and there are playing fields nearby, belonging to other schools like Eltham College.

[Rhiannon]

We already do. It's why the Steven Weinberg quote about it taking religion to make good people do evi has always been nonsense.

At best removing religion might reduce the tendency. It's possible that people x would not only not do y but would not do anything at all. The question is whether whatever replaced it drives others to do something else.

[Nearly Sane]

At best removing religion might reduce the tendency. It's possible that people x would not only not do y but would not do anything at all. The question is whether whatever replaced it drives others to do something else.

Again the problem is as mentioned earlier 'removing religion' if you are an atheist only makes sense as meaning changing what humans are to such an extent that it becomes a pointless question.

[Rhiannon]

Again the problem is as mentioned earlier 'removing religion' if you are an atheist only makes sense as meaning changing what humans are to such an extent that it becomes a pointless question.

Yes, I understand, but is there anything other than religion that offers an afterlife? Because that seems to me up be a pretty big driver in a lot of what we see.