In defense of atheism

Since the dawn of time religion has brought violence into the world. After centuries of this, some thinkers finally figured out that we need to change things. Then came the new ideas: Utopias, worlds without exploitation, equality—but the new ideas weren’t perfect. Some of these ideas evolved under secular governments and eventually became the horrors of communism.

So, dogmatic religion makes the world worse, but so does dogmatic atheism. What should we do? We need a different methodology, one that combines morality and skepticism with an aversion to dogmatism. This would be humanism. Humanists are often atheists, but not all atheists are humanists.

The word atheist simply means not believing in a god. It says absolutely nothing else about a person definition wise. I will continue to identify as an atheist and use the word, but I realize it only describes one thing about a person. Sadly, I need to go a step further and identify as a humanist in order to distinguish myself from the atheists who went a step further, and identified themselves as dogmatists.




  17 comments for “In defense of atheism

  1. The Explorations of Dylan Raines
    July 28, 2014 at 1:54 am

    Why do you need to identify yourself?

    • Ignostic Atheist
      July 28, 2014 at 2:09 am

      Because people would rather pretend I don’t exist.

      • The Explorations of Dylan Raines
        July 28, 2014 at 2:15 am

        So you only exist, if you call yourself a “humanist, atheist, christian, etc…”?

      • Ignostic Atheist
        July 28, 2014 at 2:18 am

        I said nothing that would lead you to that conclusion.

      • The Explorations of Dylan Raines
        July 28, 2014 at 2:40 am

        Perhaps I should have clarified my question. I am asking why one needs to identify themselves with a classification of beliefs. Does one need to be classified as a “humanist, atheist, christian, and so on…”?

      • Ignostic Atheist
        July 28, 2014 at 2:59 am

        As soon as you can get the Christians, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc., to stop labeling themselves as such, so will I. But until they do, it is necessary that I ensure that they don’t forget that I exist. Because they would really like for non-belief to be non-existent.

        And how about you, do you accept no labels? Is there nothing important enough to you that you would say, yep, that’s me? Or are you some kind of amorphous ideological putty?

    • July 28, 2014 at 2:35 am

      If someone asks me my name I tell them my name.

      Why would I do otherwise for my beliefs?

      • The Explorations of Dylan Raines
        July 28, 2014 at 2:50 am

        I am not suggesting that you shouldn’t, although I am curious about the originating need that we have to do so. When someone asks my name and I tell them, if they had never met or heard anything about me before, they have no images and ideas yet attached to my name which is the ‘pointer’ to who I am.

        But beliefs I think are a bit different. If I tell someone “I am an atheist” or “I am a christian” most people do have a huge database of images and ideas attached to what that means I am. So, communicating clearly can be more difficult. A filter or tunnel has already been imagined through which what I say will likely be judged.

      • July 28, 2014 at 3:39 am

        I want to do so

  2. July 28, 2014 at 9:20 am

    What, in your view, constitutes dogmatic atheism?

    • July 28, 2014 at 5:21 pm

      The Soviet Union is one example

      • July 28, 2014 at 9:44 pm

        Ok, fair enough. I thought you were going to say something about “New Atheism”. That seems to be the tact to take these days when criticizing our lack of belief….lol

      • August 1, 2014 at 4:01 am

        That and ‘internet atheism’ haha.

  3. July 28, 2014 at 4:04 pm

    Looking at humanist values, I’d agree with them. I do call myself an atheist but I don’t call myself a humanist. I’m not sure why. I tend to resist broad classifications.

    • July 28, 2014 at 5:23 pm

      I like the word atheist and we should continue to use it. Like you said it’s a broad definition in a sense because it only says that a particular person doesn’t believe in a god, it says nothing about their other beliefs

  4. July 29, 2014 at 1:10 am

    “Since the dawn of time religion has brought violence into the world. After centuries of this, some thinkers finally figured out that we need to change things.”

    This (right there) is one of the focuses I have held since I began blogging and ranting with NAME. Either you humans are praising and worshiping the SAME energy / idea / existence, or what have you, that has been imagined into our way of life, or they ALL are meant destroy the nations, regions and the people who make them what they are.

    I can see why many of the associates I know of are atheist. Or either could care less about the enterprise that is “religion”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: