Any other atheists around?

[GuybrushThreepwoodMP]

Is there a group for us atheists to discuss ideas of faith, morality, life, the universe and everything (42!)?
Note: I would not want this to become about dissing people of faith and would truly welcome discussion with anyone. This isn't about ridiculing anyone. I would be particularly interested in sharing ideas and discussing the social, anthropological, philosophical, political and psychological aspects of religion from an atheist point of view. Anyone else? I can provide and and .

But Muswell who helps you smudge along through the normal ups and downs now? I think the ways people come to terms with grief are the same for all of us, crying, talking and plenty of time. We may get them via religion but it's not the only way. It's well researched that a good social network does much to shore up our coping abilities and that can be established through all manner of avenues.

MLL, what you describe doesn't sound like magic at all.

HHD, and THAT is exactly why, IMO, people like to believe in religion, because it gives them hope that there is an afterlife where they can see their loved ones again, and that for they themselves death isn't the end either. I don't feel like I am missing out at all on lying to myself thus. I am perfectly happy knowing that this one life is it, and I will lead as good and fun a life I can while I am here, then off I go to the ground (or the sea - haven't decided!). I think it makes us appreciate life all the more, knowing we won't be seeing people once they have died.

In one of the Crocodile Dundee films, Mick is told that someone goes to therapy to talk about her problems/worries. He responds incredulously "Doesn't she have any mates?"

I think that's how I feel about needing a church or a priest for the little stuff.

There are plenty of secular organisations for helping people through serious problems.

If the church were to disappear tomorrow I think people would tend to fill the gap by joining social clubs of various kinds. They need not be a direct replacement of the church.

Going back to how we can promote a more skeptical outlook. Dh says one of the biggest differences he can see between his and our dc's education is an emphasis on questioning. While I agree, I think his schooling was rather Victorian-esq having gone through the school system in colonial Africa. I work in education and we do promote several 'learning powers' which involves evidence seeking for any assumptions but somehow religion can still fly in under the radar.

Sorry to bang on about this. We (i.e. posters on this forum) can all give our personal account of our atheism and our ways of dealing with life (e.g. grief) with no need for a church. We can all say that's how others should be able to deal with life too. That's not what I'm asking about. Each of us posting here is not the demographic I have in mind and, I suspect, is far outnumbered in the real world.

I am asking about how people who aren't strong and able atheists should deal with stuff when there might be no family to turn to, no friends they feel they can talk to, no support network in place, who can't afford therapy. The church will win that battle more often and that group of people is bigger than we are.

How do we help them or how do they help themselves?

Hettie - i don't disagree re using the term magic - most dictionary definitions do use the term supernatural. I think magic (or more often spellworking) is used to differentiate from ritual, as what it really is (the sort i've been describing) is ritual plus practical intent. There are of course people who do believe that they are invoking deities and bringing their will to bear through supernatural processes, but i don't think that is what was being talked about here.

I am still interested as to opinion on the Buddhist belief that you can only gain wisdom and understand the world as it truly is through personal experience, given that personal experience is not generally accepted as proof of anything. There is a belief that someone getting close to enlightenment will develop 'magic powers' through understanding the true nature of reality and so are able to manipulate it. Buddha himself is supposed to have had such powers.

I don't actually mind that you aren't all having a go at Buddhism btw - it is actually very close to my own philosophy, just surprised that everyone seems so prepared to accept these aspects of it.

BWT - I am not talking about our utopia where there are no churches, I am talking about the real world where all these things exist - people can turn to churches if they want to.

headinhand - Questioning and evidence seeking is a good start, I think a programme of examining philosophies and ethic systems could be a good step in the right direction (I'm hoping to work on one soon). Like you said, we do it directly for kids with history and science, but purposefully teaching how to examine a philosophy/ethics system - which underpin so many other things - could promote the expansion of critical thinking into other areas - there are plenty of non-religious ideologies that it would be good to challenge and would give skills for challenging religious things.

Particularly for those like myself who were raised in a very very religious environment and took a while to unravel all the problems and holes even when I was seeking from a young age it took a while to bring the tools from other areas to bear onto my personal philosophies. Actively teaching questioning and critical thinking onto philosophies, ideologies, ethic systems would do a lot of good.

Yes, there's an awful lot about Buddhism that I don't buy into - the most obvious example being reincarnation, and as you say, the only true path to wisdom being personal experience (I never experienced the Big Bang, but I'm wise enough to know it happened* and so forth).

But Buddhism seems to be an umbrella term for so many different schools of thought, and "cherry picking" the bits you like & the bits that resonate & work for you seems to be positively encouraged. Which is a good thing.

I am all for meditation, for example - mainly because deep relaxation is known to be highly beneficial, but there's so much bullcrap that people try to attach to it (spiritual energies & the like) that the true usefulness can get a bit buried under all the woo-hoo.

But you're right, really. When someone introduces themselves as "Buddhist", I think "Rational, calm kind of person", while if they introduce themselves as a practicing witch, I think...well...I've said what I think.

• know as in, masses of evidence demonstrating the extreme likelihood. And we can all experience the effects of the BB by looking at an untuned channel on our TVs. For clarity's sake.

I am without religion. Might be called an Atheist by others. I have no belief in anything other than knowing I am alive (Well I think I am - am I?) and knowing that I will die.

Muswel, creating more secular community support would be beneficial to all, particularly those you're talking about, but getting continual support for it is the problem I think. That's where organized faith groups have us at an advantage, they already have that in place, we'd need to build systems that could give that support, find a way of supporting that work, and make it accessible to vulnerable people.

I know online resources was crucial for me after I left because other than my partner and kids (who are still young), I had no one to talk to and no resources on putting back into my life what I felt had disappeared. Part of my identity felt gone and that was hard particularly for me as it had been a crutch throughout an abusive childhood and difficult transition into adulthood/early family life. Having a support network of people who can help both people who just need an ear and those who desire someone to help them put the pieces in their life together rationally even when going through a difficult time would be of benefit and would allow us to create a lifecycle that doesn't lean on religious rhetoric, rituals, and symbols so much.

as a person without religion I am a but 'meh' about people who talk about 'spirituality' as an alternative to religion.

Hello, just found this thread - as an atheist for about 3 decades following a youth of Christianity, I do rather miss the Church - the community and the hymn singing! I'd quite like to try one of these Sunday Assemblies but they're very few and far between if you're not in a major city. My DH goes to quite a lot of humanist and sceptics meetings (and for a few years Buddhist things too) but they're not family-friendly - in the evening, mostly a good way from where we live and DD isn't quite old enough to be left alone yet. So I find MN threads such as these a welcome meeting of minds at least.

On the mourning/grief - one of DH's pals is a Humanist celebrant - he gets more requests to do funerals than he can cope with. Apparently there's been a big increase in people wanting them in the last decade or so.

I'd guess that Buddhists may deal with bereavement better than followers of many theistic religions, because of their focus on non-attachment (whether or not they actually believe in reincarnation in any real sense).

Well I think I am - am I?

You think - therefore you are.

But what you are....who knows?

Personally, I think I'm a computer simulation created by my great x 10 grandchildren. They watch me on the loo and snigger, I reckon. But that's just me

And I agree with everything that Spork just said. Churches do promote a sense of belonging in a unique way. If we can harness that, maybe we should - but without all the voice of authority stuff.

but churches are empty throughout the land, the faithful still go but most people who call themselves religious don't go at all. A friend of mine - her family chapel (in the town she grew up in) is threatened with closure and she travels back home occasionally to keep it going. her mother plays organ, her brother is involved but that's about it.

people don't want to go to church.

churches are empty throughout the land
unless they're near an oversubscribed faith school but maybe we don't want to go there on this thread!

"unless they're near an oversubscribed faith school but maybe we don't want to go there on this thread!" or unless there's a huge amount of people wanting to get married.

Though - do people who do all the faith stuff to get their kids in schools carry on going after they have achieved their goal?

But you're right, really. When someone introduces themselves as "Buddhist", I think "Rational, calm kind of person", while if they introduce themselves as a practicing witch, I think...well...I've said what I think.

That is EXACTLY what i was getting at!

But Buddhism seems to be an umbrella term for so many different schools of thought, and "cherry picking" the bits you like & the bits that resonate & work for you seems to be positively encouraged. Which is a good thing.

I'm interested that you said that. I don't think you are wrong, but a criticism often levelled at people of faith on many threads here is that they do cherry pick the bits of their faith that they like and ignore or reinterpret the bits they don't - selecting the bits that show their god as benevolent and ignoring those that show him to be malevolent etc.

Because you're not supposed to cherry pick with Christianity, but people do anyway (and then deny it or pretend it's "interpretation") - whereas it seems to be encouraged with Buddhism. The difference between a philosophy & a religion, I guess.

I'd love to see Critical Thinking alongside or replacing RE in schools. RE can be taught as part of History so that children understand it's place in society, but separate focus on CT in a separate lesson.

Ooops, slipped into utopia again there.....

Critical thinking is being taught in schools, at least in secondary school. My son studies Religious, Moral and Philisophical Studies as a subject and critical thinking is a big part of that. Luckily for us all the staff in that department are athiests.

Yes, same with my son. He's in the 6th form now, but last year the "RE" lessons were all about ethical & philosophical issues. And the teacher he had was atheist too.

So, we're getting there, Muswell.

Yes, but picking and choosing is encouraged in Buddhism because it has to resonate with you, your experience, and if you cannot directly experience something it is to be questioned, not trusted,. This is back to personal experience being the only valid knowledge, which i would have thought would be at odds with much atheist thinking.

Yes, that's true - and put like that, yes, that is at odds with my atheist thinking.

I suspect the perception has much to do with the fact that most Buddhists I know or communicate with, seem to dismiss the supernatural altogether. Of course this isn't true across the board so if I was in a society more immersed in it, like Tibet or Cambodia, maybe I'd see it differently.

I also think it's a matter of how much harm it does - witchcraft, homeopathy, Christianity & Islam (for example) can and do hurt people. It's hard to see who people on a path to personal enlightenment are going to harm.

It's NOT the fact that people hold separate beliefs to me - it's the potential harm of those beliefs. Maybe msmiggins brand of witchcraft doesn't hurt anyone, but witchcraft in Nigeria most certainly does. And where do we draw the line?

I think the main difference between Buddhism (and Jainism and so on) and the things I mentioned above is that it doesn't involve other people, while they do (or can).

But it's a good point, well made. Thanks.