I know that it probably varies with everyone, but could you be a “true” atheist if you believed in some kind of afterlife?
My thoughts are that atheism is not believing in a god, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that you can’t believe in an afterlife.
Kind of a question, but surely it will turn into a debate.
I do not, but the question of whether huan beings possess an element that persists beyond biological death and the question of whether one or more supernatural deities exist or not identical. Certainly, many people answer the first with reference to the second, but it is not necessary to do so.
Technically, wouldn’t buddhists be this? They have no deity, but believe in reincarnation. I would assume that being alive after death would count as an afterlife.
I’m a skeptic in general, but I always found this somewhat interesting: The philosopher Alfred Ayer, a devout atheist, once had one of those “near death” experiences. As I understand it, afterwards he was convinced that there really was something to it, and began to believe there may be an after life, after all (still a devout atheist, though). I can’t really find many details on it, there’s a little here.
Dignan wrote:
What is a “true” atheist, and how does one differ from the “false” variety?
This always has been an intresting queston. I’ve heard the queson more phrashed a “can an Athiest be spirtual?” Because if you beleive there is some part of the “human” that lives after biological decay (as Spirtus said) then prehaps you would beleive then that something higher than ourselves set that eintity in motion. Dosent have to be “god” (in the concept of god as “we” think of him/her/it) but some higher concept than us would have that non decaying sprit in motion.
Tracer: I thnk Dignan means “true” in the sense of beleiving in nothing supernatural (including the human spirit) exist,as opposed to lets say someone who dosent beleive in “god” per se,but would agree there is a supernatural such as the human sprit
And for that matter, one could be a theist and not believe in an afterlife. I understand that the Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t believe in an “immortal soul”; rather, when people are resurrected, God simply re-creates their bodies (which strikes me as rather Star Trek-ian, and raises some fascinating questions about personal identity); the good live forever in perfect, immortal bodies on a perfected but still material Earth, while the wicked are simply annihilated.
Clearly, a “true” atheist disbelieves in the One True God, whereas a “false” one disbelieves in the heathens’ gods. 
Just to clarify my earlier post–JW’s do believe in an afterlife, at least for some people (although how they understand it may be different from the way traditional Christians do). Logically speaking, though, one could believe in God and not believe in any sort of personal survival after death for anyone.
by manhattan:
Very funny, manny. I think of myself as an atheist. I would like it if there is an afterlife, but I doubt that there’s anything after this. I was wondering if I decided that I believed there was some kind of after life if I would still be considered an atheist.
I think they take away your membership card…
**aynrandlover wrote:
Technically, wouldn’t buddhists be this? They have no deity, but believe in reincarnation. I would assume that being
alive after death would count as an afterlife.**
Not exactly. Buddhists accept the existence of the Gods. And when they die, rather than being re-incarnated, a Buddhist, if they’ve achieved Buddha-hood, would merge with the Universe, essentially losing their identity in it. Upon his death, The Buddha’s ego dissolved into Nirvana. At least that’s the way I understood the concept from a class back in college.
Ahh…
For one, I am very nearly a Theist who does not believe in an afterlife.
More to the point, the idea of a not strictly theistic afterlife has been played with–not entirely seriously–in some of the SF stories of Parke Godwin. It makes a kind of sense. In answer to your question, you can be an atheist and believe in an afterlife, but they may kick you out of the Strict Materialists.
Depends on your Buddhist sect. Some are truly non-theistic. Some worship Buddha as a god. Some worship the Hindu dieties or other dieties. Lots of room for developing your own personal spirituality. Kind of like Unitarians. And I’m not sure that Nirvana would qualify as a afterlife - since it often implies the loss of a personal identity.
I dunno, but I suppose I’m more of an agnostic, I think…
But I do consider myself a spiritual person. Go fig. I believe that souls, spirit, et al exist without the necessity of any god’s mucking about. We’re just too complex to be merely physical creatures. So sez me, anyhow.
What part of being an athiest would stop you from believing in an afterlife?
There could also be some kind of ‘life after death’ with a non-supernatural explanation.
How? It seems to me that as far as we can tell from emipirical examination (or from rational irreligious thought, for that matter), there isn’t one. What part of a person could theoretically have an afterlife, without resorting to the supernatural?
I know there is no afterlife, because Kosh (the Vorlon from Babylon 5) came to me in a dream and said, “There is no afterlife.”
'Struth!
Isn’t it possible that one’s definition of “afterlife” could include the act upon death of giving one’s atoms over to the earth, and thus, nourishing other creatures yet to be born?
If so, then it may be possible to say that one believes in an afterlife, but doesn’t believe in a God.
The soul.
I consider myself an athiest. But I don’t discout that that I am incapable of quantifying or understanding. The fact that noone has empirically proven that a soul of man exists, doesn’t mean it is not so.
I recently sat with my father as he died. Physiologically, one would say that the body that sat before me after he died was little different from the body that had existed there minutes earlier. When my father was alive, as riddled and wracked with cancer as his body was, there was something more there. When he was dead, it was gone. There is no tool that can measure empirically the essence of a soul.