# Are Fundamentalists the Atheist's best friend? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 27, 2010, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678 "2010-01-27T19:57:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/221 "2010-01-29T18:58:29Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > _shrugs_ And you’ll continue to argue by assertion that atheism isn’t a religion against theists who see it as a competing religion. > > However you define religion, atheism is an ideological belief that attempts to propagate itself at the expense of other ideological beliefs and their ability to propagate themselves. People who hold beliefs will argue with people who hold different beliefs. Somehow this makes atheism wrong, which means that God must exist. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/222 "2010-01-29T18:59:24Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > My point was simply that Buddhism and Taoism contain a lot of supernatural elements as popularly practiced. How are you defining supernatural? Taoism as far as I understand it doesn’t have supernatural elements. The Tao isn’t supernatural, it’s natural. It is the primary core essence of nature. That which IS. > [@](#): > > There is a state, people follow laws and vote, therefore atheism is wrong, therefore god exists. Umm…ok. > [@](#): > > I am too myopic to follow this. Perhaps. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/223 "2010-01-29T19:00:57Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > People who hold beliefs will argue with people who hold different beliefs. **Somehow this makes atheism wrong, which means that God must exist.** I think you’ve placed the bolded words in his mouth. He is not asserting that atheism is a religion therefore god exists. He’s saying atheism is just as much a religion as thesitic religions are. At least that’s what I gather. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/224 "2010-01-29T19:05:31Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > I think you’re missing the point entirely here. Maybe that’s because you’re not making it very clearly. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/225 "2010-01-29T19:05:48Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > How are you defining supernatural? Taoism as far as I understand it doesn’t have supernatural elements. The Tao isn’t supernatural, it’s natural. It is the primary core essence of nature. That which IS. [In contrast with the beliefs and practices of the priesthood, most of the laity have “believed that spirits pervaded nature…The gods in heaven acted like and were treated like the officials in the world of men; worshipping the gods was a kind of rehearsal of attitudes toward secular authorities. On the other hand, the demons and ghosts of hell acted like and were treated like the bullies, outlaws, and threatening strangers in the real world; they were bribed by the people and were ritually arrested by the martial forces of the spirit officials.”](http://www.cultural-china.com/chinaWH/History/en/166History5094.html) Look, if you simply want to argue that people in society will have rituals, you’ll find no one is arguing agianst you. I don’t see what this has to do with atheism. Atheism is the doctrine that there is no such thing as a God. That’s it. Your ranting about what societies do has no bearing on this question. ---
**Author:** ![horhay\_achoa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@horhay\_achoa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/horhay_achoa)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/226 "2010-01-29T19:07:01Z")
If something reproduces asexually, one cannot say the organism is having sex even though there might be some similarities (results in an offspring). Similarly, atheism cannot be called a religion, even though, to some people, there are similarities. If you divide the world into two groups - those that believe in ghosts and those that do not - you are going to find more similarities between the groups than differences even though the groups are diametrically opposed to each other on the issue of ghosts. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/227 "2010-01-29T19:07:48Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > I think you’ve placed the bolded words in his mouth. He is not asserting that atheism is a religion therefore god exists. He’s saying atheism is just as much a religion as thesitic religions are. At least that’s what I gather. Well, he’s wrong about that. ETA: that is, his saying that depends on a highly personal and idiosyncratic definition of religion which goes against the plain meaning of the word as commonly used and defined in dictionaries. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/228 "2010-01-29T19:08:05Z")
> [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](#): > > Maybe that’s because you’re not making it very clearly. Or maybe because you won’t allow it past your cognitive biases. Either/or. **Whole bean** seems to get it and I wouldn’t even need to explain this on another forum I post on where religion is taken more seriously. I wouldn’t even need to explain it to the handful of atheists that post there. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/229 "2010-01-29T19:11:07Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > Well, he’s wrong about that. Ok, maybe **whole bean** doesn’t really get what I am saying. I am not arguing that atheism is a religion. I am arguing that if atheism were to become the dominant thought-form of our culture, then it would have to establish common forms and ceremonies and a belief in some sort of higher power to maintain [asabiyah](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asabiyyah). And as such, if it were able to maintain a common cultural cohesion, then that cultural cohesion as developed would be pretty much indisguishable from religion for all practical purposes. My argument is that atheism is not value neutral. It is just as much a totalitarian ideology as any religion, and that accomplishing the extinguishment of religion isn’t actually the end of anything, but merely a renaming. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/230 "2010-01-29T19:11:17Z")
Never mind, saw your last post. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/231 "2010-01-29T19:12:26Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > [In contrast with the beliefs and practices of the priesthood, most of the laity have “believed that spirits pervaded nature…The gods in heaven acted like and were treated like the officials in the world of men; worshipping the gods was a kind of rehearsal of attitudes toward secular authorities. On the other hand, the demons and ghosts of hell acted like and were treated like the bullies, outlaws, and threatening strangers in the real world; they were bribed by the people and were ritually arrested by the martial forces of the spirit officials.”](http://www.cultural-china.com/chinaWH/History/en/166History5094.html) Interesting. > [@](#): > > Look, if you simply want to argue that people in society will have rituals, you’ll find no one is arguing agianst you. I don’t see what this has to do with atheism. Atheism is the doctrine that there is no such thing as a God. That’s it. Your ranting about what societies do has no bearing on this question. Perhaps you should go and re-read the OP for some context. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/232 "2010-01-29T19:17:23Z")
> [@horhay\_achoa](#): > > If something reproduces asexually, one cannot say the organism is having sex even though there might be some similarities (results in an offspring). > Similarly, atheism cannot be called a religion, even though, to some people, there are similarities. > If you divide the world into two groups - those that believe in ghosts and those that do not - you are going to find more similarities between the groups than differences even though the groups are diametrically opposed to each other on the issue of ghosts. Your “assexual” analogy would be spot on if only we were disucssiin areligionsim. Truth be told, a lot of this could be avoided if we could concede that atheism is _like_ theisti religions in many ways, including the existence of a fundamentalist faction. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/233 "2010-01-29T19:18:56Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Ok, maybe **whole bean** doesn’t really get what I am saying. I am not arguing that atheism is a religion. whatever, has the same qualities. I will admit that it appeared more to me that your were defnining religion broadly enough to include atheism as a non-theistic form of religion. whether you do this or simply say that atheism is like religion save the supernatural, just splits hairs. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/234 "2010-01-29T19:20:29Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > It is just as much a totalitarian ideology as any religion, and that accomplishing the extinguishment of religion isn’t actually the end of anything, but merely a renaming. So, do you think that all ideologies are totalitarian to the same degree and with the same goals/morals? Do you have any preferences for a particular religion in that regard? If you have any preference, is it because of the morals, the goals or some other reason? For instance, do you think that one particular religion is “correct” with regards to their supernatural beliefs, and the the morals or goals don’t matter? The other way around? Some mixture? If atheism is a totalitarian ideology, what are its goals and morals? What does it hope to achieve? Does it matter whether atheism denies the existance of gods or not? ---
**Author:** ![horhay\_achoa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@horhay\_achoa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/horhay_achoa)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/235 "2010-01-29T19:24:44Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > mswas has offered a defintion of religion that would sweep in atheism and contends that limitting the term “relgion” to only theistic belief systems would exclude belief systems he argues we have long regarded as “religions.” So far, the only person to take this head on, sort of, is Larry Borgia who appears to be arguing that Taoism is indeed theistic. I asume he would contend, Taoism would still qualify as a religion if the term were defined more narrowly to only include theistic belief systems. I nother words, he’s trying to chiop away at mswas’s argument in favor of the more expansive defintion of religion. All if this should be really obvious to anyone who’s devoted any time to actually reading this thread. Most people call a tomato a vegetable even though it is a fruit. It doesn’t make it a vegetable. Does it really matter? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/236 "2010-01-29T19:25:14Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > whatever, has the same qualities. I will admit that it appeared more to me that your were defnining religion broadly enough to include atheism as a non-theistic form of religion. whether you do this or simply say that atheism is like religion save the supernatural, just splits hairs. Essentially yes. Except that atheism is in a sort of nascent form right now, and is only at this time establishing organizations and common forms of belief. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/237 "2010-01-29T19:26:00Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > [QUOTE=Der Trihs] > Besides; the primary arguments against religion aren’t “cultural”; they are factual and logical and practical. This is a meaningless non-statement. [/QUOTE] Nonsense. Religion is wrong. It’s illogical, it has no facts to support it and it ignores physical laws and objective fact in general. It is [destructive to society](http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece). None of those are “cultural” arguments against religion. > [@mswas](#): > > I’d think it extreme to take away school choice from parents and force an anti-religious curriculum on them yes. Considering that any education that teaches logical thinking and adherance to reality is by nature anti-religion, so what? That’s just schools doing their job; the only reason it’s anti-religion is that religion is dependent on ignorance and irrationality. Why should parents be allowed to deliberately cripple their children? > [@mswas](#): > > No, I really don’t expect you to understand my point of view anymore than I would expect your Christian fundie mirror-image to. Your point of view is hardly difficult to understand. You are determined to defend religion, and like all such defenders you care nothing for the facts, or logic, or the consequences. > [@mswas](#): > > [QUOTE=Der Trihs] > So people who hate the Nazis and want racial tolerance taught in schools are extremists? :rolleyes: [/QUOTE] Back to the non-answers again, eh. It’s a pretty straightforward analogy; if hating “broad swathes of people” for their ideology is wrong, then hating Nazis and racists is wrong. > [@mswas](#): > > Of course he goes into the disingenuous notion that he’s not anti-religion, but pro-science. Same thing; the two are enemies by nature. > [@mswas](#): > > Well I’ve found that for the most part atheists do not even understand what the role of religion is. Oh, please. Religion isn’t deep, it isn’t hard to understand. It’s self indulgent fantasy, a tool of control, and a collection of idea that are better at spreading than they are at being true or constructive. > [@mswas](#): > > In short it is IMPOSSIBLE to live a life without religion. You can lie to yourself and say that you do, but there are always things you are religious about. Patriotism is a form of religion. Rabid adherence to an anti-religious stance is religious. Religion is about the forms and rituals that govern our cultural life. Pure nonsense. Religion is about lies. Religion is about faith, which is a pretty word for the denial of reality. > [@mswas](#): > > Religion is what binds society together, whether it’s a belief in the state or a belief in God. At some point you exercise through common forms and rituals a belief and adherence to the importance of a higher power. If you do not, then there is no longer a society to speak of and it will break apart as there will no longer be any commonality between the people. Garbage. Religion is the enemy of community. It teaches the valuelessness of people and the real world, in the favor of souls and afterlives. It teaches people to hate each other, even their own family if they are not religiously correct. Religion produces the atomization of society, and the replacement of a real society with a top down hierarchy where the believers do what they are told. Up to and including assaulting or killing their family or neighbors. If your son is gay, beat him; the Will of God is more important than the fact he is your son. ---
**Author:** ![kevlaw](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kevlaw/32/2281_2.png) [@kevlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/238 "2010-01-29T19:32:48Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > Why not have another name for the “I have proof” crowd. Something other than atheist. Or maybe just a modifier. Hmmm. What would a good modifier be? Something that together with the word “atheist” would mean “strict adherence to the denial of (not disbelief in) god.” It’s on the tip of my tongue. Well, there will always people who do not understand the argument, so you’ll have to go over it again for them. Defining new words won’t help with them. But your whole interchange with superfluous parenthesis was, well, superfluous. I am guessing that you each exactly understood the other’s position from the start but you had to go through the whole ritual of proposing and dismissing hypotheticals before you could acknowledge that. You could have said sollipsi-gnosti-theist, agreed to disagree (as you have each done a thousand times before in similar discussions) and then both turned on der trih or mswas which is where the real action is. But perhaps even Der Trih understands the difference between the formal use of the word “know” (“I can prove”) and the informal use (“I am pretty sure”)…? ---
**Author:** ![horhay\_achoa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@horhay\_achoa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/horhay_achoa)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/239 "2010-01-29T19:33:33Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > Your “assexual” analogy would be spot on if only we were disucssiin areligionsim. I would venture to say that most of these types of debates usually ARE about areligionism. I don’t think most atheists would care if people believed in god, but did not adhere to a religion. It is the forcing of beliefs (that are impossible to proove) on other people that gets folks riled up. You don’t see these types of debates going on between people who believe in ESP and people who do not. However, I think you would see frequent debate between the ESPers and nonESPers if the ESPers wanted to create social policy based off of their belief in ESP. ---
**Author:** ![kevlaw](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kevlaw/32/2281_2.png) [@kevlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/240 "2010-01-29T19:38:51Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > Truth be told, a lot of this could be avoided if we could concede that atheism is _like_ theisti religions in many ways, including the existence of a fundamentalist faction. What properties would a fundamentalist atheist have? How would I recognize one? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678.md?page=13)