Difference between revisions of "Talk:Atheism is a religion"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 7: Line 7:
 
...does that mean that it's impossible for a person to not have a religion? [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 19:34, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
 
...does that mean that it's impossible for a person to not have a religion? [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 19:34, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
  
−
== Overly broad definition ==
+
== Smart's "Criteria" ==
  
−
Not trying to be funny with this, I just want to know: by Smart's description, how can we consider atheism a religion and not, say, Star Wars fandom? It has experiential (many Star Wars fans recall the awe and inspiration they get from the original movies), social (all sorts of conventions and social gatherings, including two online video games), ethical (Star Wars clearly proscribes following a path of spiritual self-improvement rather than embracing the temptations of emotion), ritual (releases and rereleases of the movies are significant events, and the watching of the films themselves is observed with such fervor that any disturbance, like the revised editions, is met with fury and upheaval), and material (reverence for the original actors, reverence for the original props and any reproductions of them, etc). The only one I won't make a case for is Narrative, but this is hardly a problem as Smart admits they're not all necessary.
+
Daniel Smartt suggests that Ninian Smart's list can be used as criteria which define worldviews as religions. This seems like a misreading of Smart, who instead offers the list as the things we should look at when analyzing worldviews, religious or secular. In other, he meant for his list to be applied to secular worldviews as a way of understanding them, but not so that we can define them as religions. You can read it [http://books.google.com/books?id=14j2UrLCi64C&pg=PA130&lpg=PA130&dq=ninian+smart+narrative&source=bl&ots=Hq3WwG_mVT&sig=j-8FpwSdqohURYodSdcl46erSJY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FgybT6zxIc-_gAe864X6Dg&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=ninian%20smart%20narrative&f=false here] on page 2:.
−
So my question is, seriously: since we only need to get most of the items to classify a religion, isn't Star Wars fandom a religion? Wasn't the Civil Rights movement? Isn't any widespread movement or appreciation of anything? Please don't dismiss this as blank criticism; I would like an answer. [[User:williagz|williagz]] 12:02, 27 April 2012 (EDT)
 

Revision as of 21:24, April 27, 2012

Suggest retitling to "Atheism as a religion" and request for proof that the theory of evolution is an Atheist doctrine. Barikada 18:40, 17 January 2008 (EST)

Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby --Hadron 05:42, 23 February 2008 (EST)

If atheism is a religion...

...does that mean that it's impossible for a person to not have a religion? JohnMcL 19:34, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

Smart's "Criteria"

Daniel Smartt suggests that Ninian Smart's list can be used as criteria which define worldviews as religions. This seems like a misreading of Smart, who instead offers the list as the things we should look at when analyzing worldviews, religious or secular. In other, he meant for his list to be applied to secular worldviews as a way of understanding them, but not so that we can define them as religions. You can read it here on page 2:.

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Atheism_is_a_religion&oldid=978382"