The 'Mr entitled atheist extremist' dates

[Umberellatheweatha]

I've been noticing that often the guys I go on a date with seem to take an issue with me not being an atheist and decide its their duty to 'educate' me otherwise.

I should say that I consider myself agnostic. Well, christian really but more in just a spiritual sense. Haven't been to a church in years. So it's not like I'm little miss religious or anything (nor do I feel the need to harp on about my beliefs or convert anyone lol).

But we will be chatting and I love horror movies and ghost stuff so at some point into dating the talk may loosely go towards what our beliefs are. And I'd say basically what I've said in the paragraph above. And with some of them its like you can just see something click in them where they decide its their job to educate you otherwise.

Not that they are all necessarily trying straight of the bat to tell me I'm mental for believing something they don't (though I've met one or two). Its usually a bit more subtle.

Sometimes its just really obvious and arrogant. But sometimes it creeps up over a few dates or even once you are in a relationship as if it's become their personal mission to dissuade you from belief.

I guess its male entitlement? But it makes me think about how ive never had a guy try to convince me to believe in their faith ect but a fair few men try to convince me to give up my beliefs.

Anyway, I've just panned one after a first date there because he was giving me that uneasy feeling he was going that way.

I guess it's a good test to spot entitled wankers early on. But it's still super annoying.

Anyone else had similar experience from dating? (Or partners?) Like they take offense at you believing something they dont...

"Atheism is a belief. I'd rather believe there is no god, so I call myself an atheist."
Atheism is absolutely not a belief of any type, it is the very opposite of a belief. Agnostics are atheists. I would defend the right of people to hold any view they wish, I only have a problem when religious groups claim privileges for those beliefs, such as banning criticism of them or the right to be homophobic. Faith is not a good way to assess the world. It is belief in something for which there is no good evidence and as for a so called god, which god are they talking about? Yahweh Zeus, Ra?

I have some colleagues who have a religious faith. I think that an understanding of science is completely incompatible with religion, superstition and spirituality; it requires massive cognitive dissonance. I think a little less of them because of it. Equally, I am sure that they must feel that my life is lacking something because of my complete lack of spirituality and feel a bit sorry for me.

But we all respect each other and avoid getting into conversations which could lead to anyone feeling upset or offended.

That's fine for fairly superficial relationships. But I wouldn't want a close friendship let alone a romantic relationship with someone who was so different from me just as I wouldn't want to date someone with diametrically opposed political beliefs or moral values.

If the topic has come up on a date through a conversation about other things then that's a good way of seeing whether you're incompatible before things start to get serious. It saves a lot of wasted time.

It’s not really atheists per se that are the problem. I generally struggle with anyone who decides they are right and wish to foist it on everyone else. To be fair that can come from any particular school of thought.

It’s not really something that really bothers me all that much, I love hearing about people’s ideas and why they think them. However there has to be a base level of respect. I.E. I’m not going into the discussion trying to covert anyone to my way of thinking, but if they cross into “you’re stupid because you think/believe.” I take issue with.

Anything can be deconstructed, even atheism.

Spot on @Dervel.

I thought online dating was supposed to fix this problem. Isn’t one of the benefits that you can weed out the obvious deal-breakers like religion in advance and not waste anyone’s time?

Opposite way around, I'm atheist and husband was Catholic. I admit I have at times been outspoken about how ridiculous I find religious beliefs and debated them with friends, family and him. He has been atheist now for about 6 years after doing his own research.

I still find it a shock when I make a new friend etc and they mention religion, but I just avoid the topic further. I do think it shows a lack of analytical thought, a suspension of reality and is often coupled with conservative views that I don't agree with. I can look past it on friendships, but if it's mentioned I feel its akin to a grown adult talking about Santa Claus.

I don’t push my atheism, but I do summon it when attempts are made to persuade me otherwise.

I mean, if someone’s prepared to put unsolicited time, energy and passion into saving me from an eternity writhing in the lake of fire, the least I can do is invest a few minutes in saving them from a lifetime of mistakeness.

As someone who is neither religious nor atheist, I have no time for anyone who doesn’t respect other people’s right to their beliefs, whatever those might be. I’ve certainly known atheists so extreme they were as bad as a religious fanatic.

As a female atheist, I can tell you that one of the reasons I hate the atheist online community is that they can be just as sexist as the old Abrahamic religions that they dismiss.

But for atheists to dismiss anyone with a faith as deluded, akin to Santa Claus etc is totally ignoring the bigger picture of religion and what that person may derive from the culture, the history, community, self-improvement, critical thought etc. It can add dimensions to someone's life in a way that other things may add to an atheist's life.

I don't believe in God to be honest, but I stay connected to the church and faith because it's so much more than thinking there's a big beardy guy in the sky (in fact it's literally nothing to do with that).

@TooTiredForToday

But for atheists to dismiss anyone with a faith as deluded, akin to Santa Claus etc is totally ignoring the bigger picture of religion and what that person may derive from the culture, the history, community, self-improvement, critical thought etc. It can add dimensions to someone's life in a way that other things may add to an atheist's life.

I don't believe in God to be honest, but I stay connected to the church and faith because it's so much more than thinking there's a big beardy guy in the sky (in fact it's literally nothing to do with that).

But one can view the fundamental beliefs on which a religion is based as deluded, while also seeing very clearly that some people may not genuinely have those beliefs but still choose to benefit from "what that person may derive from the culture, the history, community, self-improvement, critical thought etc."

@TooTiredForToday

But for atheists to dismiss anyone with a faith as deluded, akin to Santa Claus etc is totally ignoring the bigger picture of religion and what that person may derive from the culture, the history, community, self-improvement, critical thought etc. It can add dimensions to someone's life in a way that other things may add to an atheist's life.

I don't believe in God to be honest, but I stay connected to the church and faith because it's so much more than thinking there's a big beardy guy in the sky (in fact it's literally nothing to do with that).

I can understand that people with a religious faith may benefit from the sense of belonging to a culture and that the community can be really important. I also realise that religious belief can be comforting during difficult times.

But critical thought? Really? You've jumped the shark with that one. To have faith requires believing what you are told (whether by family, religious teachers, community leaders or a holy book) without needing evidence. It is the complete opposite of the scientific method where you look at evidence, form a hypothesis on the basis of that evidence, test the hypothesis, modify it if necessary and form a theory if the evidence (based on testable, reproducible experiments) supports the hypothesis. Faith demands the suspension of critical thinking.

I can't comment on the male attitude about this, but I'm a life long atheist and could never have a romantic relationship with someone who believed in God. I'd just find it too uncomfortable as it is a very fundamental thing to me. Maybe it's a good thing that they are at least checking you out over this, because, like me, they might feel it is grounds to say that you are incompatible.

Having read a few more responses - I don't sneer at people who have faith. I'm very interested in religion and understand that people can have spiritual feelings and beliefs they don't feel they need scientific evidence for. I know lots of colleagues and friends who are like this and am very wary of saying I am a fervent atheist in case it offends. I just wouldn't date someone who wasn't.

Atheism to me is a fact borne out by science (and likelihood, given what we know of the universe). So while I can put aside religious beliefs in friends and colleagues, I couldn't do so for a life partner. And I have on occasion argued my views with believers willing to listen.

Maybe it's you OP that brings up the subject- if someone told me sincerely they believe in ghosts (over the age of about 12), I probably would laugh. Especially in a dating situation. Sorry.

But critical thought? Really? You've jumped the shark with that one. To have faith requires believing what you are told (whether by family, religious teachers, community leaders or a holy book) without needing evidence

Not sure I agree. It's not a science like chemistry but it's more akin to philosophy, the very essence of critical thought. Lots of religious people throughout the ages have been deep, questioning, critical thinkers and still can be. My own experience of religion has never been to accept teachings as fact or believe everything I've been told.

I guess I'm saying scientific rationale has its place but it's not the only way to assess and consider this very nuanced and complex Universe, and other ways of thinking can be valuable and valid.

I have some colleagues who have a religious faith. I think that an understanding of science is completely incompatible with religion, superstition and spirituality; it requires massive cognitive dissonance.

Plenty of scientists have faith, so your belief in the incompatibility of science and faith is demonstrably wrong. Own your own cognitive dissonance instead of projecting it onto others.

'To have faith requires believing what you are told (whether by family, religious teachers, community leaders or a holy book) without needing evidence'

Actually I disagree. I'd say, at least for me, faith means believing in something despite not having any hard evidence. Evidence is great, and if I had some irrefutable proof I would probably follow a religion, but I haven't got that - hence I'm agnostic. I believe in 'something' but I'm not sure what. Absence of evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that it can't be proven by existing methods, or just hasn't been yet. You can't absolutely prove that you love someone, you just feel it or you don't. Same with faith.

That's not the same as blindly believing something without needing evidence just because you're told to. In fact that's exactly why I'm not 'religious' because I don't believe in what I was taught as a child and that 'version' of God.

My love of science and interest in the natural world is partly what gives me faith that there is a higher power. It's absolutely possible that science and faith can co exist.

'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.'

Plenty of scientists and critical thinkers have had faith. I think it shows a very dull mind, that you can't imagine anything outside your own experience. There's a difference between organised religion and faith.

@TooBigForMyBoots

I have some colleagues who have a religious faith. I think that an understanding of science is completely incompatible with religion, superstition and spirituality; it requires massive cognitive dissonance.

Plenty of scientists have faith, so your belief in the incompatibility of science and faith is demonstrably wrong. Own your own cognitive dissonance instead of projecting it onto others.

I am well aware that plenty of scientists have faith. They must compartmentalise so that they apply the scientific method and rationality to their work but are happy to rely on faith for their religious belief.

To me, the two systems of thought are diametrically opposed and incompatible. It's akin to 1984 where party members were expected to be able to simultaneously hold 2 opposing points of view if required to do so by the party. I think that necessarily involves cognitive dissonance.

What cognitive dissonance of my own am I supposed to be owning?

Your argument seems to be simply that some scientists have faith so I'm wrong to say that the 2 are incompatible. That's a pretty weak argument. Even Catholics would say that only God and the Pope are infallible. I haven't come across any religious teachings which say that educated people are inevitably infallible.

@Lessthanaballpark

As a female atheist, I can tell you that one of the reasons I hate the atheist online community is that they can be just as sexist as the old Abrahamic religions that they dismiss.

Ain't that the truth?!

You said I think that an understanding of science is completely incompatible with religion, superstition and spirituality; it requires massive cognitive dissonance. Plenty of scientists have excellent understanding of science alongside their faith, so they are compatible, some would even say they are complimentary. You think they are incompatible, therefore you believe it to be true despite evidence to the contrary. That is not critical or scientific thinking. That's your cognitive dissonance.

I don’t think it’s rude to say you you don’t understand how anyone can believe in religion. It’s just honest. I have never had faith in any religion despite being exposed to it repeatedly as a child at school. I genuinely didn’t understand how it was possible to believe in god and as a kid I used to argue about it with people. I stopped that at about 13 when I worked out no one ever changes their mind because you tell them religion makes no sense. Then as an adult I had an episode of generalized anxiety disorder and suddenly I got it. I was having unpleasant intrusive thoughts. Nasty thoughts, being scared of ridiculous possibilities that were just never going to happen. But those thoughts were really powerful because they caused such a strong emotional response (the anxiety part). It took a lot of work and effort to learn to control those thoughts and they did fade. But if you’re having positive thoughts about the existence of a benevolent god or fate or whatever and they are tied to strong positive emotions then even though you can acknowledge the cognitive dissonance, you still have that ´faith’ or feeling that the thought is true. And why on earth would you ho to a massive effort to get rid of those religious thought patterns if they were added positively to your life rather than causing anxiety ?

Science or more accurately the scientific method is a methodology, NOT a belief system in and of itself per se. Thus it is in no way incompatible with faith. A lot of fundamentalist atheists merely believe in Materialism (or latterly Physicalism), as opposed to Idealism (which is the metaphysic philosophy that underpins faith based approaches).

There is no cognitive dissonance for the faith based scientist as they are working with a different premise, but it’s perfectly valid logically. It would be harder to maybe have faith with a Materialist paradigm, I’d have to think on it in a lot more depth, but even that might not be impossible.

Personally I think someone making the claim that adhering to science and religion requires cognitive dissonance is displaying an astounding lack of imagination, and would probably do well to brush up on some philosophy.

That said it is important to note some of the landscape this discussion occurs in. Particularly in America, there has been a lot of flat out prejudice against atheists, you’ll find it very much harder to run for political office there unless you at least pay lip service to some religion (preferably a denomination of Christianity), and there are other areas they are given a hard time. So it’s hardly surprising many have formed a group identity around it.

@TomPinch

"I have never heard my atheist father come out with such hogwash.*"
*
Sorry, I don't understand your point. I'm not your father - and unlike organised religions I have not signed up to follow a particular code of what is snd is not the correct way to express my thought (or belief).
So I think you can conclude your father is different to me? Wow. Groundbreaking conclusion.