What is an Atheist?
Posted: Friday, August 19, 2011
by Hannah Quinn
Too-Write! Professional Services
Firstly, I do not speak on behalf of all atheists; I am not a proponent of ‘atheism’ which is too fervent and somewhat closed-minded; nor do I belong to any particular type of movement or group other than the human one/s.
People assume many things about atheists. Rarely are they right. Assumptions are made on what is told to them at best, preconceptions in the middle, and outright (defensive) hostility at worst.
It does not mean I am an anarchist, a hedonist, a bacchanal, unethical, a materialist, a libertine, a decrier of belief, an absolutist, an egoist, a pagan, nor any of many other labels (often worse) which are often applied to an atheist. I even believe in a societal conformity, consideration and good-old basic manners.
I was raised in the Catholic religion, and found it wanting at an early age. I was strapped many times, from the age of eight or so, for asking the ‘wrong’ questions. It did not convince me as an ‘argument’ against questioning.
When I state to a believer than I am an atheist, the vehemency, supposition and berating I am assailed with is almost universally a constant. No doubt this happens to many atheists, if not all, but I am making my own individual position here. Atheists don’t gather furtively in dark corners to ‘practice’ non-belief, so I can’t say explain another’s position. Although I can say that when discussing the topic with other atheists, the shoe is sometimes on the other foot as they assail and lament the believer. Not always, and pleasingly, not that often.
Most atheists are not of the ilk of Richard Dawkins nor Christopher Hitchens. They do not ‘preach’ nor sneer nor try to impose or dissuade. They don’t pepper their arguments with hyperbole, belligerence or hubris but accept reasonably that others believe what they believe and only become ‘bothered’ when they are themselves ‘attacked’ and will also show/speak their disapproval of non-believers who ‘attacked’. To be specific, by ‘attacked’ I mean berated, insulted, intimidated, etc, not perpetrated physical violence. Thankfully, I only know of rare incidents of such and have never experienced other than verbal violence myself.
Atheists, in the main, are no different in their lives than believers. You have probably meet more than you realise and might even consider them friends, good people, hard workers, law abiders, caring and responsible; perhaps even someone in your family.
Last year, I went to Mt Beauty, in the Victorian snow region (Australia) with my daughter, son-in-law and (at the time) youngest grandson. While there, my son-in-law invited an old friend over for a meal. They don’t get to catch up often due to the physical distance of where they both live and work. Their friendship has been a good one for over 20 years. For a number of those years, this friend rented a room from my son-in-law.
This was the first time I met this man. He presented as a personable and happy sort of chap and we settled down to a delicious meal prepared by my son-in-law. (That reminds me, I still haven’t got the recipe for the sauce he made!) The conversation started, general things, family news, updates on recent activities, the usual things. It then took a turn to the scientific but with a religious overtone. I announced that I am an atheist.
A discussion ensued between our guest and myself. It became heated, from his point of view. Not able to sustain his arguments beyond ‘I know…’ and ‘I believe…’, he became frustrated and angry and fired rapid questions at me and interrupted my answers with yet more questions. My son-in-law pointed out to his friend that he was being belligerent, rude and arrogant, so he did attempt to pull back and our discussion became, in the main, more reasonable.
However, putting the ‘tension’ aside, he had preconceptions and faulty suppositions on which he gauged me. There were many angles he tried to come at me from, all leading to the fact that I was immoral, self-centred, uncaring and a dozen other negatives. None of these are true. Far from it. He said at one stage that he had never met an atheist before. I asked him how he knew that. If I hadn’t told him I was one, he would have met one without knowing.
My point is this. An atheist is not someone who either has or should have some brand on their forehead. They are not automatically followers of evil, the devil nor out to destroy everything good and solid in the human community. They are little different than those who believe. Their difference is that they do not believe.
I suppose one of the ironies of the evening was that this guest learned that not only is my daughter an atheist but that my son-in-law is also an atheist. (This choice my daughter made came after being raised on both the knowledge of religion, having stories from religious texts read to her and attending a variety of religious worships and ceremonies during her child. (My children were free to make up their own minds, were expected to take the time and make the effort to come to their own conclusions and knew I would support whatever choices they made; all three are atheist.
This surprised him. Twenty years of friendship and he hadn’t realised it, despite things my son-in-law had told him over the years. To our guest, his friend of twenty years was such a decent ‘ordinary’ man, he had assumed he must have religion and belief.
If nothing else, I gave our guest some things to think about. I did not try to dissuade him from his own beliefs in religion or divinity; I did try to dissuade him from his belief that because some one does not believe what he does that they are therefore some type of ‘enemy’ to be avoided rather than risk contamination, degradation or corruption.
I am a highly moral person, that is I have principles, integrity and ethics. I treat people with respect and believe that what is in a person’s heart towards others is far more important to the sustenance and cohesion of society than particular religious beliefs. All people should be judged and valued upon their actions and interactions.
I also believe that basic morality-cum-ethics springs from the reliance we have on each other. We are a community of people, not singular persons. We need each other to not only survive but to thrive. Therefore, it is important that we have an essential code of conduct on which to base our actions toward each other, both to the individual and to the group. This, in my opinion, is the well-spring of morals. If it was encapsulated in a book, and not one single book but the variety of religious texts, it is because we have found that it works and made it part of who and what we are.
I have deliberately chosen not to discuss here, the high incidence of abuses, stigmatisation and war that has been fought in the guise of various religions. It is a huge subject, too big for this article.
If there are responses pointing to this article, I will choose to respond only to those proffered with a sense of decorum and consideration. If not, more than likely, I won’t respond. Vitriol per se will be removed.
This Article has been viewed 714 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsWow! What a well thought out writing and personal philosophy! Most of the time I don't comment on my non-religious views for just the reasons you encountered. How open of you! Your article was mentioned in a headline and I just HAD to read it all. Now I'm a fan and want to know more of your thoughts. Delightful! Insightful. Most interesting . . .
Thanks, Octavia.
It is not easy to be open about having different views on many things in life, not just faith-based belief, because it is confronting to people when they have a defined belief. Just being in a room full of football fans when you hate football can be an intimidating situation. To announce your non-belief in religion is a far more serious step. It shouldn't be, but it is. Perhaps in Australia it is a little easier, not as easy as it once was, and I'm sure I am alienating many a potential reader of my fiction, (so a bit longer before I can retire and become a full time author) but you get to an age where you know the most important thing in life is being who you really are.
I suppose I feel that there is a necessity to stand my ground against the increasing and more strident fundamentalist and/or conservative attitude that permeates politics here and around the Western world. Even the most secular of democracies are consolidating to a hard core conservatism. Such times as these can move us forward or have us repeating a past we stepped out of less than a century ago. I'd rather be villified than turn my back on this potential step back.
I'd love to know more of your thoughts if and when you want to bring them forth. I'd never suggest you do unless you are prepared for the possible ramifications. I think it is easier for me because I am not proselytising anything and think (intend to be) impervious to proselytising no matter what form it takes.
You use the term religion or religious many times in the article, but spirit or spiritual none. A chapter in the AA book asks, When you look in the mirror do you really believe that what you see is the highest level of consciousness and spirit and the most powerful thing in the Universe? It seems so shallow. As a Quaker, I accept an individuals right to have complete freedom of thought. I have no right to comment on your beliefs. Forgive me.Thanks for taking the time to read and comment, Jack.
I do use the term religion or religious in this context and not spirit or spiritual. I see quite a distinction between them. In many ways, I am a spiritual person in that I believe there is more to life than the physical human life, primarily in interconnectedness of everything. I've done a lot of meditation over the years, especially with visualisation to reduce my stress levels. On one such guided occasion, we were told to visualise a cathedral. After, we discussed it. Everyone else, without exception, saw the traditional cathedral, man made, internal, devoted to faith and deity. My cathedral was the bush, surrounded by tall mountain ash, eucalypts and teeming with life, both animal and plant life. The choir was one of birdsong, insects and the rustling of leaves and grass. In this I see a type of spirituality. It is not of the divine, it is not of a book of dogma, it is not of being set within walls either actual or metaphysical.
I don't know anything about the AA book but I would have thought that the question would more suitably be 'Do you really believe that the best level of consciousness is at the bottom of a bottle?' I have neither the knowledge nor the hubris to know the answer to the actual question posed. However, because I do not know the answer, nor necessarily agree with the parameters of the question, does not mean that therefore there is a god or a definitive answer. I am comfortable with not knowing such answers, and acknowledge that humans might never know such answers. (Are we even asking the right questions?) It neither leads me to a 'comfortable' answer nor to feel lessened. In fact, it means I must more consciously choose my values and character based on a far broader basis than either myself or a book of direction. Lack of knowledge is not evidential of anything more than lack of knowledge.
As to shallow, I can understand how many, most people might think so in this context. I think this is more to do with psychology and the need to have absolutes than it is of anything else. As to religion, I see it has a positive element in its sense of community, we all have an intrinsic need to belong, but a negative, even destructive element in terms of its absolutes, lack of questioning and easy dismissals of alternatives, including often of other religions. It never fails to strike me how often the same easy platitudes are ready on the lips of the 'religious' when they learn I am an atheist. Or the ready assumption that I must also be a follower because I have ethics and ethical children. It is this assumption that often leads me to 'disabuse' them, politely of course, and with mixed reactions.
I must say there are many things I admire about the charitable works of religions, and some things which fill me with dismay about charitable works. For instance, I sponsored a child in Bangladesh through World Vision Australia. The support for the child was withdrawn when he didn’t want to go to school, at age ten, and that was that. He and his family were on their own to survive or not survive. Sponsorship was not even transferred to one of the younger children. I was given another sponsor child but I withdrew and have now gone with an alternative, non-religious programme. This, directly, has nothing to do with deity, but it has to do with religion which is ‘informed’ by belief in divinity.
I use to be an atheist even after I seen Jesus Christ, I still didn't believe in God. However I came to an awaking on night which changed my entire life. Not only did I come to an awaking of God but also of the devil. I believe a lot of atheist who don't believe may be closer to God than those who do believe. I enjoyed reading your article HannahThanks for taking the time to read and comment, David.
They do say belief is a matter of faith, it seems that is your 'new' position. I'm sure you are content within it but hope you never stop questioning. I also believe many atheists are more ethical than some believers because their attitude is conscious and deliberated, rather than instructed. Of course, we are all following a degree of instruction to reside within community, some of it might even be considered a form of dogma, and I rue the decline in basic consideration of manners (not the etiquette of which fork to use when) which allows an ease of interaction and co-operation of community.
Great stuff, some very good points raised. It is unfortunate, but true, that atheism is seen as a major character defect by many. The reality is that the vast majority of atheists are just normal, decent people, and are just as moral and loving as anyone else. When I first joined Searchwarp (a few years ago now) there were very few "out" atheists here, I'm glad to see there's more people willing to be open about their atheism here nowThanks for reading and commenting, Ben.
There is a strong religious bent in the members here. I wondered at first if it was a religious run site. I like the new categories which allows for more ideas to be discussed without the unnecessary vitriol that can sometimes accompany such statements as 'I am an atheist'.
I really enjoyed reading this, thanks, and I like your closing comment! I can understand how frustrating Catholicism was for you - I had the same experience, although I wasn't physically hurt. I also rejected formal religions and have come to a completely different understanding about life. It seems to me that you take your integrity really seriously and that you think deeply about life. Well, I know a lot of people who believe in "God" but behave shockingly and don't care that they have no integrity. I prefer your way of doing things, it's much more honest and responsible.Thanks for reading and commenting, Jennifer.
There is much hypocrisy within religion and belief. As well as the illogicality of belief, which was confounding as a child, and well worth contemplating as an adult drawing her own conclusions.
This is my second attempt at a response as I managed to lose the first one somewhere in the ether. So frustrating!
I am responding to your lovely, measured and human article because this is a subject that is very close to me. I was educated by catholics although my upbringing was vaguely Anglican. In fact I went to the same school as Jennifer who commented just above, but I suspect that as I had no expectations or real involvement with the catholic church I was not in a position to feel let down or threatened by it. Curiously I would say that that religiously based education taught me how to think for myself and to respect other people's opinions. I am still fascinated and bemused by the way that each devotee of each religious sect or cult believes passionately that their path is correct and that some of them even believe that they alone hear the voice of God. This leads to immediate confusion because views are so contradictory that this version of God is surely demented or at best very confused!
As an adult I have been firmly in the agnostic verging on atheist camp for the last 30 or so years until about 18 months ago. I now find myself in a very embarrassing position of having to admit to changing my mind. There has been no road to Damascus blinding light, no voice of angels, not even a prophetic dream, just for some unidentifiable reason a change of heart. And heart is what it is about. Intellectually I cannot really see any argument that makes sense for the existence of God - let's face it there is no empirical proof possible - but nevertheless I have felt compelled to change my world view. So I find myself in the ludicrous position of being a convinced atheist who believes in - well, God I suppose.
I am now reading as widely as I can in the hope that this will somehow inform me enough to have a conviction one way or the other that makes sense both intellectually and emotionally. I have become convinced that God is different for each one of us and that the No God option is just as valid. We all find our own path and each path has validity. Your atheist views are firmly grounded in your own morality which of course leads to the difficult question of whether there is a moral absolute. If there is, then God rears his head again even if you don't believe in a personal deity.
I was interested though in your statement that there are a great many atheists who pretty much hide their views. In my experience it is rather harder to admit to having any religious conviction. Even to say publicly that I believe in God has ben rather like coming out and I must admit that it is rare for me to touch on the subject. When put on the spot I rather shamefacedly will mutter something about really not being sure but that yes on balance I think I do believe in some kind of Eternal Unity. As for formal religions, they have their place but personally I don't think I want to belong to a club.
What is vital is the search, the questioning and the journey we all undertake and the finding of our own personal path whatever form that may take. What is incomprehensible is a failure to question or search.Sorry for the loss of your first comment, Penny.
I'd be curious if you've studied Deism at all. It seems to me that all of what you have written about here could work within Deism.Thank you for your measured response, Penny. I was very interested in your point that it is rather harder to admit having religious conviction. Is this a personal position/experience because you have changed your view? Or is it a more general point? I think geography sometimes has to do with this, and the times lived in. It was easier to declare you are an atheist prior to 2001 for example. In fact, in Australia, prior to that date, the Census had shown an increasing number of atheists. After 2001, and especially 2002 when Bali was bombed and 188 Australians died, that number declined and has been declining since. The latest Census was in August. It will be interesting to see the religion question results. It was also the only question which was optional, which I think somewhat defeats the point of having the question in the first place. The churches have reported an increase in denominations since 2001, or at least a lessening of decline. It will be interesting to see what the figures are in 10, 20, 50 years time (not that I will probably know the 50 year results unless I make it to 110 and beyond - which I wouldn't mind as long as I can continue to contemplate and question).
I was an atheist for 9 years.....that was quite some time ago.
Thank you for reading and commenting, Marijo. Is it possible that you weren't really an atheist for those nine years but a 'believer on sabbatical'? Perhaps not. I can't say, obviously. We draw conclusions and then later we draw different conclusions based on different or new criteria and evidence. It is one of the delights of a thinking mind.
Good article. Interesting that just a couple of months ago I was contemplating my own religious beliefs. Since I have grown up in a big city there are so many different religions. One of my closest friends in Islam and when I ask him about his religion and what it consists off, it gets me thinking what if he's on the correct path of religion. My best friend is Agnostic and when she explains why she is agnostics, it also seems logical. Then there is me, raised Catholic but not a consistent church goer. My Nana believes God can hear your prayers anywhere anytime, and I do agree. I recently started going to church consistently and even though I have picked back up my catholic religion I don't think that anyone is wrong for believing whatever they choose to believe.Thank you for reading and commenting, Ashley. I agree with your last sentence. We believe as we believe and it's more important to acknowledge that than to proselytise any particular belief. . To me, it is not about how or what someone believes, or does not believe, but about how they behave towards both themselves and others. Enjoy your contemplations.
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.