Is there such a thing as an atheist worldview?

[Kei]

It depends on the sense.

An atheist doesn’t necessarily disbelieve in immaterial beings.
An atheist also doesn’t necessarily disbelieve in highly advanced material beings.

Some of these beings may fit the term “god” in pagan contexts but certainly not in a classical monotheistic context.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Kinda like being a “little bit” pregnant?

 

[Raxus]

In my experience, atheists either do not define their worldview by their atheism, or it ENTIRELY defines them. There are militant atheists out there, and there are those for whom it’s just an aspect of their lives. I don’t see very much middle ground.

 

[Raxus]

I can immediately think of several sects that claim Christianity as their belief yet aren’t Trinitarians…you are using your Catholic definition. See the problem?

But the Catholic definition is demonstrably the true one. Some things are half-truths, areas of grey, but there is also black-and-white.

 

[Dan123]

But the Catholic definition is demonstrably the true one. Some things are half-truths, areas of grey, but there is also black-and-white.

They would, I’m sure, argue their position is demonstrably true.

 

[Raxus]

Not in the same sense. But someone can be an atheist and still believe in immaterial beings, some of whom may be called “gods”.

This seems to be splitting hairs a bit, past the point of usefulness. I don’t know of any atheist to date that has said “I don’t believe in God or gods, except for a few of these beings that may or may not be gods.”

 

[Raxus]

They would, I’m sure, argue their position is demonstrably true.

So then both sides break out their proof, it’s examined, and whoever is right is right. Black n’ white.

 

[Raxus]

What exactly is a ‘worldview’?

noun

1. a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.

“I have broadened my worldview by experiencing a whole new culture”

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Definitions from Oxford Languages

 

[Kei]

This seems to be splitting hairs a bit, past the point of usefulness. I don’t know of any atheist to date that has said “I don’t believe in God or gods, except for a few of these beings that may or may not be gods.”

In the West I don’t think it is all that common, though maybe in a certain way (advanced aliens etc).

 

[Dan123]

In the West I don’t think it is all that common, though maybe in a certain way (advanced aliens etc).

The only place I’ve heard of advanced aliens being worshiped as gods is on Stargate. I mean I miss that show but that’s about as far as I’ll go.

 

[Freddy]

Dan123:

They would, I’m sure, argue their position is demonstrably true.

So then both sides break out their proof, it’s examined, and whoever is right is right. Black n’ white.

The topic was the trinity. You can prove that?

 

[Freddy]

FiveLinden:

What exactly is ‘the glory of God’?

In Scripture, the phrase “glory of God” has been used in different ways. It can mean His greatness, His Majesty, etc.
What I mean here is, in a general sense, to descibe living in a way pleasing to Him, trying to do what He calls me to do, in love.

But c’mon, Kei. This is only applicable in retrospect, if that. Fancy another beer? Thinking about Vegas for a short break? Maybe buy that camera you wanted? Want to get a house with a pool? Apply for that promotion?

I think you do what we all do and weigh the pros and conns. Another beer? Why not, you deserve a chance go relax. But that waistline…Vegas? Well, maybe I should put the money towards the college fund instead. But a good chance to enjoy some time together with the wife. New camera? Gee, a man needs a hobby. But then, the boiler needs fixing.

You have the same choices we all have. Have the extra beer and God might think you’re overindulging. Skip it and He might think you deserve it and you should relax more.

Every action we take and decision we make has consequences. We try to imagine the implications and decide it they have positive or negative consequences in the short term and the long term and we move on accordingly. Sometimes it’s short term pain for long term gain (beer or the gym) and sometimes it’s inconsequential whatever we choose (steak or chicken).

I’m not sure God considers the minutae of your life to hold too much importance in the grand scheme of things. He seems to be a Big Picture type of guy to me.

 

[IanAG]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Thought this may help.

As I said in my initial post, atheism is not a worldview in the sense that it doesn’t provide answers to the existential questions of life. It is merely a position.

This chart shows a comparison of the eight most dominant contemporary western worldviews, although it’s not comprehensive because it doesn’t include Islam, for example.

You could argue that there are thousands of worldviews, but to qualify philosophically they would need to answer the seven existential questions and be internally consistent. Maybe someone would like to post a link to a website which references these thousands of worldviews.

The golden rule by definition is not a worldview, but a maxim.

 

[BlueKumul]

Atheism is just absence of belief in supernatural forces, so there are thousands of possible atheist worldviews, such as:
-Extropianism
-Existentialism
-Postmodernism
-Hedonism
-Marxism
-Evolutionary psychology
-Nazism/Fascism

 

[Freddy]

Evolutionary psychology

Might possibly explain everything about us. Still working on that proposal…

 

[IanAG]

Evolutionary psychology

Maybe you could explain to me how evolutionary psychology answers the seven existential questions?

 

[Freddy]

BlueKumul:

Evolutionary psychology

Maybe you could explain to me how evolutionary psychology answers the seven existential questions?

It doesn’t. It only explains our response to them. Our reaction. Why we perceive things as we do. It doesn’t answer the questions in themselves. Although, it might give an insight into number 3: What is a human being?

 

[IanAG]

It doesn’t. It only explains our response to them. Our reaction. Why we perceive things as we do. It doesn’t answer the questions in themselves. Although, it might give an insight into number 3: What is a human being?

Okay, then maybe you could explain to me what it sees as our response to those questions? Or is it maybe a scientific theory as opposed to a philosophical worldview?

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

It doesn’t. It only explains our response to them. Our reaction. Why we perceive things as we do. It doesn’t answer the questions in themselves. Although, it might give an insight into number 3: What is a human being?

Okay, then maybe you could explain to me what it sees as our response to those questions? Or is it maybe a scientific theory as opposed to a philosophical worldview?

Gee, I could be here all night…so a short answer:

1 and 2: We only perceive parts of existence. We can’t see the micro world or appreciate the macro. We only see what we want to see sometimes and unconsciously ignore some aspects of existence and over attribute the importance of others. We have a very limited view.

3: We are a product of the evolutionary process. A vessel for the propogation of genetic material. A part of the universe that has become self aware.

4: I’m not sure it would answer this.

5: The meaning of history depends on what view we take and that depends on the position from which we view it.

6: We hope to live on. Through our children. See number 3.

7: It’s based on what worked in order for us to form societies.

 

[Raxus]

The topic was the trinity. You can prove that?

Yes. It’s the only thing that makes sense from logical exegesis of the Bible and examination of theological history.