Goal of anti theists

  • Thread starter Thread starter IanAG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IanAG

Guest
I wonder, what is the end goal or objective of anti theists? What are they hoping to achieve?
 
IanAG said:
I wonder, what is the end goal or objective of anti theists? What are they hoping to achieve?
Click to expand...
I think it’s a belief by some that although religion gives succour and hope in a hopeless world and that faith is a comfort to so many that it would be better to face the reality of existence as they perceive it.
 
IanAG said:
Oh dear, I wonder why they would want to do that?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t read malice into it. Or at least, not for all atheists. Some just enjoy debate and discussion and are perfectly nice as people.
 
IanAG said:
Oh dear, I wonder why they would want to do that?
Click to expand...
Where I work, if you work hard and care about what you are doing, the lazy staff want to destroy you because you make them look bad.

Maybe it is the same?
 
To destroy religion.

I’m not sure what they think will replace it.
Some shiny utopia, I guess
 
RolandThompsonGunner said:
I wouldn’t read malice into it. Or at least, not for all atheists. Some just enjoy debate and discussion and are perfectly nice as people.
Click to expand...
I agree, I have some good friends who are atheists. I was thinking more about the anti theists, those who are totally opposed to religion, I think what some would describe as ‘New Atheists’.
 
Christopher Hitchens is probably the most famous anti-theist in recent times. He believed that religion is somehow the primary source of hatred and violence. So naturally, he challenged it and thought it would be better for humanity not to believe in it. What motivated him was clearly moral; yet denying God removes any absolute ground or ultimate reference for morality (see Nietzsche).

What impressed me about Hitchens, and helped me realize about intellectual debate in general, is how the power of suggestion is much more effective rhetoric than logical reasoning.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think there is a goal for (most) anti-theists. Rather, most reject God for their own reasons. Some of these reasons are rooted deep in human nature, and will be here with us forever.

Here are some common reasons I have observed anti-theists seem to reject religion. I am sure we can all relate to these feelings and thoughts – even if we do not accept them – as they are deep in our human nature.
  1. A judgmental God is a frightening prospect, as it forces us to acknowledge our sinfulness and weakness. This is difficult, particularly if we have made very bad choices in our past.
  2. We want to fulfill our own selfish desires and appetites, and not fear that God is “looking over our shoulder” and judging our sins.
  3. We want to be gods ourselves. Today, this manifests very strongly as worship for technology and “science”, which are after all, crafted by men (or so we can think).
  4. It can be difficult to acknowledge how little control we have over our own lives, and so hard to accept that in the end, God controls everything, and that all good in our lives (indeed, our very existence) exists only by the grace of God.
  5. We have experienced evil or horrible tragedy and the idea that an all-powerful God would permit this is intolerable to us rationally and/or emotionally. Of all, this is the most honest one, and one which makes me sympathize most with those atheists among us.
When they reject God, religion becomes an enemy, as it stands in diametric opposition to whatever they believe – whether it be politics, wealth and success, or materialist beliefs held as divine.
 
IanAG said:
I wonder, what is the end goal or objective of anti theists? What are they hoping to achieve?
Click to expand...
I have no idea what anti-theists are hoping to achieve, they’re probably just reacting to the same things that most people react negatively to…hypocrisy, superiority, and self-righteousness.

Not that religious people are any more prone to such things than anyone else, but as with most things, it’s the most vocal among them that garner the majority of the attention, and it’s precisely this vocality, smugness, and self-superiority that makes them so annoying.

It’s much the same as how theists react to vocal anti-theists, people are just naturally aggravated by hypocrisy, superiority, and self-righteousness.

It’s part ego, and part integrity. We dislike being told that we’re wrong, but even more, we hate your being so darn sure that you’re right. People can accept your faith…it’s your self-righteousness and hypocritical attitude that they can’t stand.
 
Neithan said:
Christopher Hitchens is probably the most famous anti-theist in recent times. He believed that religion is somehow the primary source of hatred and violence. So naturally, he challenged it and thought it would be better for humanity not to believe in it. What motivated him was clearly moral; yet denying God removes any absolute ground or ultimate reference for morality (see Nietzsche).

What impressed me about Hitchens, and helped me realize about intellectual debate in general, is how the power of suggestion is much more effective rhetoric than logical reasoning.
Click to expand...
Christopher Hitchens had a lot of issues with anger and hatred.

There is a saying in 12 step recovery…hurting people hurt people.

He grew up with an alcoholic father and a neurotic mother, and was sent away to an English boarding school at only eight years of age, a school which significantly was Anglican. His mother ran away with an ex Anglican priest, and died with him in a suicide pact when Hitchens was only in his early twenties. Could that have something to do with his anti theism?

I don’t see him as admirable at all…I pity him. I think he was a deeply troubled man who, rather than seek recovery lived, aided by drink and tobacco, to project his pain onto others.

God is love. I’m not sure, but I think Hitch was more angry with love itself, probably because he’d never experienced love as a child and resented those to whom it came naturally.

Now Thich Nhat Hahn, there’s an atheist I can admire.
 
Last edited:
IanAG said:
What are they hoping to achieve?
Click to expand...
I think it’s quite natural for most people to just want their ideas to be heard. In most cases, the anti-theists I know are simply adding to the conversation, at least if it’s with me. If we come across as non-threatening and willing to listen this will almost always be the case. I love shopping in the great market place of ideas, as Penn Jillette puts it. Everyone has something valuable to add to it. Engaging those who disagree with us always offers the opportunity to strengthen faith through reflection and education. It may even point out areas where we have made erroneous assumptions and bring a reassessment of certain notions. Those rare few who approach with hostility and ill-intent are easily recognized. Answering them with calm and kindness generally defuses this.
 
There is no doubt at all that religion does harm. Most religious people agree with this, but they often notice the harm done by other religions and find ways to redefine what their own does.

Religion also does good.

If you happen to not accept that there is a god(s) then it makes sense to think through the idea of whether religion on the whole does more harm than good. If your conclusion is ‘yes, a lot more harm, and serious harm’ then opposition to religion makes sense. It is exactly the same sort of reasoning that an atheist would make about other aspects of society, like the use of cars, drinking alcohol, contact sports and so on.

An anti-theist is most likely to be seeing simply to reduce net harm.

Most theists, in relation to at least some other religions, and sometimes in relation to every religion, including parts of their own, are like this.

There are plenty of CAF members who have expressed anti-theist views in relation to Hindu gods, to Satan worshipped as a god, to God as seen by Muslims and so on.
 
FiveLinden said:
An anti-theist is most likely to be seeing simply to reduce net harm.
Click to expand...
Presumably if an anti theist is seeking to reduce net harm, then he would need to consider the potential harm caused by whatever worldview he proposes would replace religion? Or is he assuming that there is an ideal worldview which would eliminate harm altogether?

Also, I assume that he would need to undertake an in depth inventory of the benefits and costs of religion from an objective, rational basis rather than an emotive, subjective position.

I wonder for how many anti theists this could be said?

By the way, medicine does harm but we don’t label healthcare bad. Science does harm…plastic pollution, CO2 emissions, nuclear waste…but we don’t label all science bad. What’s so special about religion?
 
Last edited:
lelinator said:
It’s part ego, and part integrity. We dislike being told that we’re wrong, but even more, we hate your being so darn sure that you’re right. People can accept your faith…it’s your self-righteousness and hypocritical attitude that they can’t stand.
Click to expand...
Then I guess that their argument is with those individuals rather than God and religion as a whole.

I have a good friend Ahmed who is a Muslim. As a result I have learned to have a lot of respect for Islam. Just because there are fundamentalist extremists who are clearly not following the teachings of Islam, I don’t disrespect and criticise my friend’s faith. He is a good example of it.

I live and let live.
 
Like we are not facing reality? The Catholic faith gives the hope of eternal life and that makes temporal suffering far less of a burden. Christ Himself said “If the world hates you, remember it hated Me first” (John 15:18) and that has been 100% true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top