So you're an atheist. Ok, what next?

[cyborg]

well, yeah, but that's more avoidance isn't it.. whenever atheism has been tried on a grand scale it has been disastrous, much worse than any religious abuses in the past.

plumjam, you may want to open your eyes to the UK.

You see those people in Newcastle on the street? Most of them couldn't give less of a **** about religion.

Just an FYI.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Let's say you've lived at least a couple of decades, you've examined the options, and you've arrived at atheism.

Well.
Here you are.

What do you do now?
Let's say you then spend a few years trying to rescue other humans from what you (not they) regard as stupidity.

Ok. Then what?

What can you do that is positive?
Are there any specifically atheist 'values'?
Are there any specifically atheist charities that endeavour to improve the plight of individuals?
(I don't think I've heard of any. Whereas religious charities there are thousands.)

Well, it's up to you. What next?
Preferably positive.

A bunch of stupid questions, that is what comes next.

 

[Nogbad]

Lunch.

Coffee and doughnut for me

I need it because I am completely baffled by this oneupmanship of good deeds.

Ecclesiastes 1:2 springs to mind.

 

[linusrichard]

why doesn't it surprise me that you're a lawyer?
everyone else has implicitly recognised that the 'what next' is obviously related to how atheism affects the 'what next'

Oh, obviously I recognized that that's what you were going for. But I didn't think I had an obligation to give you the answers you were fishing for. I gave you honest answers to the questions you actually asked. If you don't like the answers you're getting, maybe you should be asking different questions.* Or maybe, if you're not satisfied with honest answers, you shouldn't ask questions at all.

They weren't honest questions. You weren't looking for answers, you were looking for confirmation of your worldview. You were looking to make a point. When my honest answers to your dishonest questions showed the flaws in the point you were trying to make, you dismissed them as "facetious" and dismissed me as a "lawyer," and made .

What is it you're trying to do here, anyway?




*Is that from a movie?

 

[DOC]

Why do you characterize atheists as some kind of crusader type?

I imagine he did because many are:

Madeline Murray O'Hare was a atheistic crusader who led the campaign to kick prayer out of schools.

All these new books coming out by atheists (like Hitchens) are on a crusade against Theism. For example Hitchens even attacked Nobel Prize winner Mother Teresa -- that sounds like a crusader to me.

The ACLU is on a Crusade to remove all religion from public areas. (like manger scenes at Christmas)

You seem to be portraying modern atheists as some laid back, passive, live and let live group when the evidence is otherwise.

Atheists have the right to be on crusades, but don't deny they are on crusades.

You seem to be making the error of equating atheism with some kind of belief system, morality, or philosophy. I think It isn't. Atheism, at it's kernel, is lack of belief in a deity, pointe finale, that's it, that's all.[/b]

The "American Atheists" organization would disagree with you. The definition of atheism they put on their website does have a belief system and a specific philosophy. I counted the words "believe or beliefs" about 8 times in the definition of atheism they have on their site.

From American Atheists website:

The following definition of Atheism was given to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S. Ct. 1560, 10 L.Ed.2d (MD, 1963), to remove reverential Bible reading and oral unison recitation of the Lord's Prayer in the public schools.

“Your petitioners are Atheists and they define their beliefs as follows. An Atheist loves his fellow man instead of god. An Atheist believes that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth for all men together to enjoy.

An Atheist believes that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction, and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and enjoy it.

An Atheist believes that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment.

He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man.

He wants an ethical way of life. He believes that we cannot rely on a god or channel action into prayer nor hope for an end of troubles in a hereafter.

He believes that we are our brother's keepers; and are keepers
of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.”

http://www.atheists.org/Atheism/


Atheists have the right to have all of these beliefs but people shouldn't deny atheists have beliefs (which happens a lot in these threads).

 

[H3LL]

Just keep busy.

The alternative...



is wasting time and doing nothing useful.

.

 

[Mojo]

Why not ask DOC what he'd do if he thought he would get away with it without suffering divine retribution?

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Avoid wasting any more time of my life responding to insipid questions like the OP?

 

[cyborg]

Atheists have the right to have all of these beliefs but people shouldn't deny atheists have beliefs (which happens a lot in these threads).

Do you understand the difference between a class and an instance?

 

[calebprime]

Yes, 3.

Yes.

Indeed. Here, as you adeptly point out, I am. I am here. Here I am.

Well, I'm trying to balance law school with being a husband and a new dad, which is challenging, but a lot of fun. Also I try to hang out with friends, play some Wii, maybe do some reading, see a movie now and then.

That's an interesting description of what a lawyer does, actually, although I don't think it applies to all lawyers. I suppose it could also be an description of what a parent does, in a sense. So, as a new parent and a soon-to-be lawyer, maybe I will spend a few years doing that.

Or did you mean proselytizing for atheism? Why would I spend a few years, or even a few minutes, doing that?

Retirement, travel, more reading.

Mainly raise my daughter the best I can. Career-wise, some lawyers are in a position to do very positive things. Think Ralph Nader, think Gideon's Trumpet, think The Buffalo Creek Disaster. I don't know if I'll be in that position, but I can hope! Maybe I could get into politics, if the American public can overcome its bigotry enough to consider voting for an otherwise qualified atheist.

Of course not. Assuming you don't believe in leprechauns, are there any values you hold that directly flow out of your nonbelief in leprechauns?

Not that I'm aware of. But I'm pretty sure there are secular (non-religious) charities. Bill Gates gives billions through his foundation, and he's at least an agnostic, maybe an atheist. Warren Buffet is an atheist and he gives billions as well. It doesn't matter to me if a charity is administered by theists or atheists, as long as it's administered well. Also, there's nothing stopping me from giving to a religious charity - again, presuming it's administered well. If I make enough money, I could even start my own atheist charity. Red Nothing? No, what's the point? If I start a charity, it would be secular, of course, but there's no reason it would have to be specifically atheist. Do you know of any charities specifically devoted to a nonbelief in leprechauns? Isn't it the case that most charities completely ignore the question of the existence of leprechauns? That would be my charity's position on God.

Indeed. I think some of those charities are probably fine, and when I start making some money, I wouldn't be surprised if some of my charitable giving goes to religious charities.

Raising my daughter. Completing my degree. Establishing my career, and hopefully making a positive difference through my work. Further service through politics, if it seems feasible (not likely). Charitable giving. Retirement. Travel. The pleasures of growing old with my family. Dying in my sleep at an advanced age. And that would be it!

Is this what you were looking for?

None of it was facetious.

Lunch.

Oh, obviously I recognized that that's what you were going for. But I didn't think I had an obligation to give you the answers you were fishing for. I gave you honest answers to the questions you actually asked. If you don't like the answers you're getting, maybe you should be asking different questions.* Or maybe, if you're not satisfied with honest answers, you shouldn't ask questions at all.

They weren't honest questions. You weren't looking for answers, you were looking for confirmation of your worldview. You were looking to make a point. When my honest answers to your dishonest questions showed the flaws in the point you were trying to make, you dismissed them as "facetious" and dismissed me as a "lawyer," and made .

What is it you're trying to do here, anyway?

I was going to answer, then I saw this exchange with linusrichard. My answer would have been merely a variation on his, with some individual differences. They weren't honest questions.

 

[thatguywhojuggles]

I used to be able to pick up some great recipes in threads like this one. What's up guys??

 

[Bluefire]

Let's say you've lived at least a couple of decades, you've examined the options, and you've arrived at atheism.

Ok

Well.
Here you are.

Obviously

What do you do now?
Let's say you then spend a few years trying to rescue other humans from what you (not they) regard as stupidity.

That's quite the assumption. I don't debate religion to "save" people. I do it as a hobby, and as a mental exercise. Also, I have a strong interest in ideas/philosophy, and religion is obviously part of that.

What can you do that is positive?

Live my life to the fullest extent possible.

Are there any specifically atheist 'values'?

No, because Atheism is not a philosophy. It is a position on one specific question.

Are there any specifically atheist charities that endeavour to improve the plight of individuals?

Not Atheist, because that kind of charities are held together by a common thread that is more comprehensive than one specific position on one question. There are alot of specific charities that are not specifically religious.

Well, it's up to you. What next?
Preferably positive.

Live the life you have. Be productive, make friends, fullfill your dreams if you have any.

I think you are sort of asking the question "no god? Well, then what is the meaning of life?"

To me, life doesn't need a meaning "higher" than itself. Eg. the meaning of life is itself, eg living. Have as much fun and experiences as you want. I specifically do not think that the meaning of life is to be a "charity".

I would also say that religion doesn't help in this question at all (eg. if you can not find a meaning in a life on earth without a god: What meaning would there be in a life with god after this life?).

So what am I doing? I work hard (as a software engineer). I help people that have value for me (mostly family). I try to train up hobbies that I think are fun (I'm shooting a gun at a club, and I train the Piano as well as some composing) . I debate different stuff intellectually, and occasionally I party and let loose.

I do not subscribe much to the stereotype of what one should do to be "good":
- I do not personally give much to charity (and I'm not the slightest embarrassed by that). My life is mine, and I help the ones that mean something to me.

If you need to know my philosophy, I consider myself highly influenced by Ayn Rand and her philosophy objectivism. Atheism is but a small part, and by far not the most significant part of it.

 

[Bluefire]

Folks, this is where atheism, taken to its extreme, leads you.

Really, need I say any more?

The hell it is. Atheism is one position on one question. The questions of morality is a question answered by a philosophical system. There are several philosophical systems , that have an atheistic position, that gives moral quidance, and definitions of what is good.

 

[Bluefire]

yeah, but the point is that neither of you were so inspired by atheism that you chose to go into working with the homeless, whereas some people who wouldn't otherwise have dreamed of doing that are so inspired by theism that they go into that area.

I am also not inspired by my ahomeopathy to start a charity. And I am not inspired by my adowserism, also, curiously not my ademonism either.

As we can see, there is obviously no ademonist charities. As such, not believing in demons implies a big void...

 

[linusrichard]

Atheists have the right to have all of these beliefs but people shouldn't deny atheists have beliefs (which happens a lot in these threads).

First, let's leave the ACLU out of it. The ACLU is not an atheistic organization. They defend civil liberties for all, including Christians:
http://www.mauinews.com/story.aspx?id=26128
http://web.archive.org/web/20050308...a.org/Issues/freespeech/News-SpokTransit.html
http://www.aclu.org/religion/schools/20174prs20050920.html


Next, the others you mention, O'Hair was just an individual. Hitchens is just an individual. American Atheists is just a group. They can claim to speak for all atheists, but they don't really. I think you are a Christian - would you like me to post what Latter Day Saints thinks a Christian is and try to hold you to it? Or (far worse) Westboro Baptist? Or World Church of the Creator? Of course not. If I'm talking about Christians in general, I'm going to use a generally applicable definition of Christian. You have to believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, maybe virgin birth, crucifixion and resurrection, and that he is some kind of redeemer or messiah. Same idea with atheists. Atheists for Jesus is an atheist group. Church of Satan is basically an atheist group. I think the Raelians are too. That doesn't make me responsible for their beliefs, or them for mine.

Hitchens might be on a "crusade" (I don't know, I'm no fan of Hitchens), but if he is, it's not The Atheist Crusade, it's just an atheist's crusade.

 

[Bluefire]

everyone else has implicitly recognised that the 'what next' is obviously related to how atheism affects the 'what next'

Atheism only has a small effect on the "what next". The effect is more of the fact of no eternal life -> this life is more valuable. Atheism (or rather, a(personal god theism)) itself also inspires one to take full responsibility for making what one wants happen. When I was religious I often prayed for stuff I wanted instead of working to get it.

Other than that it's a question of philosophy, not a question of atheism.

 

[Bluefire]

talking about objective meaning and directionality, not the subjective 'life's what you make it' meaningless 'meaning' and 'directionality.

How does religion give you that?
In what way is the eternal life with god "meaningful", in a way that this life would not be?

 

[Bluefire]

I imagine he did because many are:

Madeline Murray O'Hare was a atheistic crusader who led the campaign to kick prayer out of schools.

All these new books coming out by atheists (like Hitchens) are on a crusade against Theism. For example Hitchens even attacked Nobel Prize winner Mother Teresa -- that sounds like a crusader to me.

The ACLU is on a Crusade to remove all religion from public areas. (like manger scenes at Christmas)

You seem to be portraying modern atheists as some laid back, passive, live and let live group when the evidence is otherwise.

Atheists have the right to be on crusades, but don't deny they are on crusades.

Some atheists are (not many, not nearly as big percentage as christians though). I think it is appropriate. Because if you think that this life matter, and humanity matters, then ideas matter alot.

The "American Atheists" organization would disagree with you.

The "American Atheists" organization would be wrong. What they describe seems to be some outline of what could be a humanist philosophy.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Let's say you've lived at least a couple of decades, you've examined the options, and you've arrived at atheism.

Well.
Here you are.

What do you do now?
Let's say you then spend a few years trying to rescue other humans from what you (not they) regard as stupidity.

Ok. Then what?

What can you do that is positive?
Are there any specifically atheist 'values'?
Are there any specifically atheist charities that endeavour to improve the plight of individuals?
(I don't think I've heard of any. Whereas religious charities there are thousands.)

Well, it's up to you. What next?
Preferably positive.

I guess I don't understand the question. What do you mean by "What next"?

What next is that you live your life.

Can you elaborate on your question?

 

[DanishDynamite]

so it's basically an emptiness, a nothingness

What is "basically an emptiness, a nothingness"? Your life as an atheist?