Dawkins: I'm a cultural Christian

[T'ai Chi]

And moreover, I didn't say there hasn't been a culture with majority as vague 'free of confession'-ers.

I said there's been no culture, from what I can tell, with atheism as its center. Like for example, archeologists come across some ruins, find some parchment and an old building, determined to be used by many people for worshipping something. Is there an atheist equivalent of something so influential? They don't seem to leave much tangible goods that says 'Aha! This culture was predominately atheist.' to the archeologist.

And I'm not sure how to interpret "Atheists in Germany nominally belonging to a religious group". Would that make them religious or atheist? It is kind of vague.

 

[danielk]

You have yet to present actual statistics for *this* claim.

The second table does precisely that, although for the whole of Germany. Look it up, it says 61%. If anything, the percentage will very likely be higher for Berlin alone. And don't forget to add the atheists nominally belonging to some religious denomination.

It is crystal clear that atheists enjoy at least a simple majority in Berlin by a good margin. From the numbers I have found I cannot say for sure that atheists enjoy an absolute majority, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do. It's definitely close.

 

[danielk]

And moreover, I didn't say there hasn't been a culture with majority as vague 'free of confession'-ers.

That's just a commonly used term in Germany. Look at the second table.

Is there an atheist equivalent of something so influential? They don't seem to leave much tangible goods that says 'Aha! This culture was predominately atheist.' to the archeologist.

That request will never be fulfilled since atheism by itself doesn't come with any cultural elements prepackaged. You can have a culture that is predominantly atheist, but I don't see how that would be recognizable from artifacts, except by an apparent lack of religious symbols. Anyway, it's probably true that atheist cultures were rather rare during the history of human civilization. However, the present does look a lot better in that regard.

And I'm not sure how to interpret "Atheists in Germany nominally belonging to a religious group". Would that make them religious or atheist? It is kind of vague.

This part of the data is based on a questionnaire. They asked people whether they believe in the existence of a god. Good enough for you?

Anyway, I don't know why you insist on being pedantic here. I could have used numbers from former socialist countries to smack you down, if I had wanted to show the highest atheist percentage. I didn't because I think socialism is too close to being a religion itself, and it would have been unfair because religion used to be suppressed in these countries. On the other hand religion didn't enjoy nearly the full comeback some had hoped for after the Wall fell (religious people are still a minority, but have reached two-digit percentages now if I remember correctly). Of course, Berlin includes an Eastern part, so we have a good mixture here.

More to the point, religion plays hardly any role in daily life. Strongly religious people are a curiosity. However, it isn't a culture "based on atheism", but simply a culture lacking religion. The former would be nonsensical.

 

[T'ai Chi]

The second table does precisely that, although for the whole of Germany. Look it up, it says 61%.

Well of course I can see that number right there, but your logic is off.

Your table shows the % of atheists in Germany that are free of confession, not the % free of confession in Berlin that are atheists, which is what you are after.

 

[T'ai Chi]

That request will never be fulfilled since atheism by itself doesn't come with any cultural elements prepackaged.

Well neither does just a 'spiritual' feeling, but we see tons of examples of such sentiment manifesting itself in archeological finds throughout history.

You're expecting me to believe that in all the history of the planet, no doubters of religion anywhere will leave anything behind on atheism but a few books here and there? If you're saying atheism is important, and people build buildings and monuments about important things, you'd think you'd find a few.

I could have used numbers from former socialist countries to smack you down, if I had wanted to show the highest atheist percentage.

I'm sure.

 

[danielk]

Well of course I can see that number right there, but your logic is off.

Your table shows the % of atheists in Germany that are free of confession, not the % free of confession in Berlin that are atheists, which is what you are after.

Ah, I see what you mean now. However, the table is correct. I should have used a better caption. Here's the original German:

Innerhalb aller Kirchenmitglieder bzw. Konfessionslosen sind die Anteile:
Evangelische Kirchenmitglieder sind zu 20,6 % Atheisten
[...]

And then the other numbers, just as in the table. The part after the colon translates to "20.6 % of the members of the Evangelical church are atheists". The same goes for each row, including those "free of confession".

ETA: Oh, and you could choose between the following options in the questionnaire:

1. Es gibt einen persönlichen Gott (there is a personal god)
2. Es gibt irgendein höheres Wesen oder eine geistige Macht (there is some higher being or spiritual power)
3. Ich weiß nicht richtig, was ich glauben soll (I'm not sure what to believe)
4. Ich glaube nicht, dass es einen persönlichen Gott, irgendein höheres Wesen oder eine geistige Macht gibt (I do not believe that there is a personal god, some higher being, or a spiritual power)

Only people who chose the fourth option were counted as atheists. In other words, the numbers I have shown don't even include agnostics.

 

[linusrichard]

I said there's been no culture, from what I can tell, with atheism as its center. Like for example, archeologists come across some ruins, find some parchment and an old building, determined to be used by many people for worshipping something. Is there an atheist equivalent of something so influential? They don't seem to leave much tangible goods that says 'Aha! This culture was predominately atheist.' to the archeologist.

Why would such a thing exist? Why would, or how could, a culture be centered around atheism? If a culture were mostly atheist, why would we be able to find evidence of this? Five thousand years from now, will archaeologists be able to tell from our ruins that most of us didn't believe in leprechauns? Why not? Why wouldn't we have some parchment or an old building or something dedicated to our non-belief in leprechauns? I don't have statistics, but I would wager at least 98% of our society doesn't believe in leprechauns. In the face of that vast uniformity of unbelief, why wouldn't we leave some evidence behind? In the face of that vast uniformity of unbelief, can you really say we don't have a culture centered around aleprechaunism?

 

[danielk]

Well neither does just a 'spiritual' feeling, but we see tons of examples of such sentiment manifesting itself in archeological finds throughout history.

Yes, there are many ways to express a spiritual belief, and we recognize the forms of worship known to us.

You're expecting me to believe that in all the history of the planet, no doubters of religion anywhere will leave anything behind on atheism but a few books here and there? If you're saying atheism is important, and people build buildings and monuments about important things, you'd think you'd find a few.

Atheism is only important in a cultural sense if embedded within a religious culture. What do you expect an atheist artifact to look like? Is it so hard to understand that atheism by itself cannot have any cultural elements? It's defined as "not something else"! An isolated pure atheist culture without any known theist heritage wouldn't even be aware of its atheism.

Anyway, as I already stated I don't actually care much if there were atheist societies throughout history. If there were, it can't have been many. Human civilization is barely ten thousand years old as far as I'm aware. We progressed from gods and spirits for everything scary or important in nature, to organized polytheism, to monotheism. There's a clear tendency towards the abstract. Now we only need to get rid of one more god and we're done.

But there is no need to push it as long as we're left alone. Force wouldn't work anyway, and maybe there will always be people who need to believe in a god of some sort. So no need to worry.

 

[m_huber]

Question: do Buddhists believe in anything that would qualify them for theism? I honestly don't know.

 

[linusrichard]

Well neither does just a 'spiritual' feeling, but we see tons of examples of such sentiment manifesting itself in archeological finds throughout history.

I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Is there an archaeological find you're aware of that shows a cultural importance placed on "just a 'spiritual' feeling"?

You're expecting me to believe that in all the history of the planet, no doubters of religion anywhere will leave anything behind on atheism but a few books here and there? If you're saying atheism is important, and people build buildings and monuments about important things, you'd think you'd find a few.

Did he say atheism is important? I don't see how atheism is important, in a cultural sense. Rational thought is important, to a certain extent, and atheism is the necessary result of rational thought applied to the question of God, but I still don't see it.

You're looking at atheism through theist glasses (which is not entirely your fault, I guess). You think the God question is important because you believe in God. This doesn't mean the God question is important. If there is no God, the God question is not important. If a culture believes there is no God, it is natural for that culture to not consider the God question important. There's an asymmetry there that you're missing. Many cultures have centered themselves around their particular answer to the God question, but only because they had a positive answer.

 

[linusrichard]

Question: do Buddhists believe in anything that would qualify them for theism? I honestly don't know.

This isn't the easiest question. Although Buddhism doesn't require a belief in any deity, there are some Buddhist sects that I think it is only fair to describe as theist (I'm thinking particularly of Pure Land here). Additionally, many Buddhists also believe in other religions.

In short, I consider Buddhism an atheist religion, but many, if not most, Buddhists are theists.

There are Buddhists on this forum - I don't know if any of them are watching this thread.

 

[Foster Zygote]

You're expecting me to believe that in all the history of the planet, no doubters of religion anywhere will leave anything behind on atheism but a few books here and there? If you're saying atheism is important, and people build buildings and monuments about important things, you'd think you'd find a few.

Just in case you are reading the posts of people you claim to have on ignore, I would like to ask: What is your point?

Why do you insist on treating atheism as though it is some equal opposite to religion? Do you know why there are no monuments to atheism? Do you know why atheism isn't at the center of any societies? It's because atheism is rarely at the center of the lives of individual atheists themselves. Atheists rarely base their lives on atheism the way a Christian bases his life on Christianity or a Muslim bases her life on Islam. I can only speak for myself, but I'm confident that many atheists here will agree when I say that I would not even think of my atheism at all if not for the fact that other people are theists who engage in behavior that ranges in spectrum from willingness to engage me in interesting conversation about their differing beliefs, to imposing laws based on their religious beliefs that threaten my liberty, to actively wishing me death and suffering because I do not share their beliefs. Outside of that atheism has little significance to my life. I am an atheist, not an Atheist. Atheism is not the center of my life.

 

[-Fran-]

Why would such a thing exist? Why would, or how could, a culture be centered around atheism? If a culture were mostly atheist, why would we be able to find evidence of this? Five thousand years from now, will archaeologists be able to tell from our ruins that most of us didn't believe in leprechauns? Why not? Why wouldn't we have some parchment or an old building or something dedicated to our non-belief in leprechauns? I don't have statistics, but I would wager at least 98% of our society doesn't believe in leprechauns. In the face of that vast uniformity of unbelief, why wouldn't we leave some evidence behind? In the face of that vast uniformity of unbelief, can you really say we don't have a culture centered around aleprechaunism?

Myself, I show my dedication to aleprechaunism by NOT buying a tacky garden gnome and put it in the yard The non-existence of garden gnomes here is quite telling.

 

[linusrichard]

Myself, I show my dedication to aleprechaunism by NOT buying a tacky garden gnome and put it in the yard The non-existence of garden gnomes here is quite telling.

Good point. I'm sure future archaeologists will note your gnomeless yard as a very significant find!



(How will they reconcile it with my tackily begnomed yard? I can see the paper now: 21st Century America: A Nation in Conflict...)

ETA: Oof, you're in Sweden - make that 21st Century Earth: A Planet Divided.

 

[-Fran-]

Good point. I'm sure future archaeologists will note your gnomeless yard as a very significant find!

I damn well hope so! Or all this frantic non-buying of garden gnomes will have been in vain

(How will they reconcile it with my tackily begnomed yard? I can see the paper now: 21st Century America: A Nation in Conflict...)

ETA: Oof, you're in Sweden - make that 21st Century Earth: A Planet Divided.

 

[Henners]

I said there's been no culture, from what I can tell, with atheism as its center.

...which is exactly as it should be.

Cultures should have humanity at their centre.

Sky fairies are for cripples.

 

[m_huber]

This isn't the easiest question. Although Buddhism doesn't require a belief in any deity, there are some Buddhist sects that I think it is only fair to describe as theist (I'm thinking particularly of Pure Land here). Additionally, many Buddhists also believe in other religions.

In short, I consider Buddhism an atheist religion, but many, if not most, Buddhists are theists.

There are Buddhists on this forum - I don't know if any of them are watching this thread.

I kind of get the same impression from what I know of Buddhism (which isn't as much as it should be).

If Buddhism is in fact an atheistic belief system, then many Asian cultures could be described as cultures based on atheism.

 

[articulett]

And yet T'ai Chi continues to talk about matters of biology that he is obviously ignorant of.

T'ai continues to talk about MATTERS that he is obviously ignorant of.

I think that scientific progress and civil rights has been hindered by religion every step of the way... they do like to blind themselves to their outright abuses and elevate tangential help that promotes the fabulousness of theism-- but the points are not very valid-- yes, the church supported science for a bit...it was the only way people could get educated and it had all the money--but when science started questioning it's doctrine, they put the ignorance blockages in place.

When civil right leaders are theists--religion gets credit; when bad guys are atheists, atheists get the blame. Religion gets a lot of credit for good more rightly done for secular reasons and atheism gets the blame for everything bad.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I have a cultural conundrum when it comes to diet. Am I a cultural Muslim/Christian/Jew/Buddhist/Hindu because I love lamb, but eat ham, sometimes don't eat meat on Fridays, but don't eat fish, love beef hot dogs but won't give up lobster and shrimp, love veggie dishes, but won't give up my meats and to come full circle, while I love lamb, I won't give up hamburgers?

The observation of holidays, be it date, rites or holy songs I can take or leave, but my decision about what I want to breakfast, lunch or dinner will never be dictated by any religion I observe or do not.

When civil right leaders are theists--religion gets credit; when bad guys are atheists, atheists get the blame. Religion gets a lot of credit for good more rightly done for secular reasons and atheism gets the blame for everything bad.

Can someone quote this so Arti will get a chance to read it?

If you haven't read Susan Jacoby's Freethinkers yet - do so. She makes an awesome case about how while the Temperance Leagues and Southern black pastors get all the historical press, atheists and secularists were very much active on the front of women's sufferage the Civil Rights era. While her investigation into the issue of slavery is informative, I think the forgotten history of the involvement of secularists (especially atheists and agnostics) in the 20th Century is fascinating compared with the revisionism of D. James Kennedy and web idiots like DOC, etc.

 

[linusrichard]

If Buddhism is in fact an atheistic belief system, then many Asian cultures could be described as cultures based on atheism.

I don't agree. Even if you find a culture based on Buddhism (some Asian cultures are, some are not), that doesn't mean that the culture is based on atheism. It's not that atheism is a part of Buddhism, it's just that theism is not a part of Buddhism.

Buddhism is an aleprechaunist belief system, but it doesn't make sense to consider any Asian culture to be based on alprechaunism.