How many religious people attribute this (nihilistic) view to atheists?

In My Humble Opinion
1

When I was in high school, a social studies teacher was talking to us about religion*. I had recently decided that I was a non-believer, and something he said which I considered overly general prompted me to state that I was an atheist. In the ensuing discussion, he asserted that atheism was “belief in nothing”. I was tempted to respond that this wasn’t really true - that atheism was “belief that there is no supreme being”. But I was already a little ill at ease from having incited the obvious disapproval of this authority figure, so I kept my mouth shut.

I didn’t give much thought to the discrepancy until recently.

I was talking to a friend and former colleague who is about fifteen years older than me. He’s retired; I’m getting close to it, and we often discuss estate matters. We are both childless bachelors who’ve salted our money away. Unlike me, he is very conservative and religious. He has described how he plans to disperse his estate, part of which will go to his church.

I told him that I was looking into where to leave my money, and was thinking about setting up a scholarship fund at the engineering college I attended. The school was heavily taxpayer-subsidized, and I feel very grateful that I was able to afford college without going into debt. I probably would not have gone to college if it had been necessary to take out loans (which students pretty much have to do today). College made a huge, positive difference in my life, and I can’t think of a better use for my money after I’m gone than to enable other students without means to improve their lives.

My friend dumbfounded me by asking at one point, “F., why do you care about what happens after you’re gone? You’re an atheist”.

This comment has me wondering if that was what my high school teacher believed I was asserting when I said I was an atheist.

And, whether the belief is common (or at least, not unheard of) among the faithful: that atheists don’t just believe that there is no supreme being (and/or no afterlife), but that the world sort of goes away when we’re not around to perceive it.

Obviously, I consider anyone who believes that the world goes away when they die to be very, very wrong. AIUI, there are some religions which postulate that everything is an illusion, which sounds pretty similar. But I’ve never known anyone who claimed to ascribe to this specific belief. And I could understand refusing to vote for a candidate for political office who professed it. Frankly, I consider it an idiotic belief.

But having said that, I also think it’s idiotic to equate this belief with atheism.

Are there super-zealous religious people teaching this (that atheists believe the world goes away when they die) to their kids, possibly, to discourage them from even considering atheism?

It might explain some of the really low rates of trust that the public has for atheists.
*This was in West Virginia in the 1970’s.

2

Sounds like the intersection in the Venn diagram between atheism and solipsism.

3

Further thoughts:

It’s pretty common for people of all beliefs (or lack thereof) to hold very warped views of how people of different beliefs actually think. So it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that there are religious people out there who believe all sorts of things about atheists.

If there’s no afterlife, but you just cease to exist upon your death, then the world does indeed go away from your point of view.

Then there can be reasons to care about what happens after you die, but they can’t be “what’s in it for me” kinds of reasons.

Plenty of atheists can and do care about what happens after they die; but if a particular atheist didn’t care, I’m not sure how you could convince him to care.

4

I have a distinct memory of Sunday morning church school (Christian), and a discussion about how atheists “hate God”.

That right there got me to thinking about this whole dumb premise.

5

Because he or she could set in motion things that make life better or worse for those still living, and those to come - in the family line, if nowhere else.

If I’m shot and bleeding out and going to die, I could say that nothing I do matters… but if I get one last shot off and kill the attacker, and save my family or increase their chances of surviving, it should matter even though I’ll be cooling meat in a short time. Multiply that by what you’re talking about, leaving significant money to help people you’ll never meet, who may not be born when you croak.

Worthwhile.

6

On hearing this I would have been sorely tempted to respond, “Ah, I see we have opened up the floor to discussing our mis-conceptions about each others beliefs. I LIKE THIS GAME, MY TURN!”

But, alas, that would have been unkind, I suppose.

Really, though, you are not obligated to disabuse this friend beyond the notion that he holds incorrect assumptions, nor offer a more detailed rebuttal.

7

I don’t really read this quote as him thinking that YOU think the world will objectively stop existing after you’re not here to perceive it

He’s surprised that you have an emotional connection to what will happen after you’re dead, and not perceiving things. Probably that means that some of his emotions about leaving money contain elements of ‘looking down from heaven and being able to see the good that my money is doing’

The quickest way to counter it would be something like 'Yeah, but if I gave $1,000 to build a school in Burkina Faso RIGHT NOW I also wouldn’t see it, since I’m not intending to get on a plane to the other side of the world to watch my money at work" IOW, whether or not you are in a position to perceive the results of your philanthropy isn’t actually a thing for you, in the way that it is for some people. Whether the separation is spatial, or temporal, doesn’t actually matter here.

8

I’m a theist myself… but I very much fear the particular sort of theist who thinks of atheism in the way that the OP describes. People have consciences, independent of their belief or not in a god or gods, and the only way someone could think otherwise is if they’ve somehow managed to learn to ignore their own. And a person who’s learned to ignore their own conscience is very, very dangerous.

9

This is approximately the counterpart to the simplistic idea that religious people only follow a moral code because they fear what their God will do to them if they don’t. It isn’t true!

Naive and simplistic ideas about “the other guy” are nearly always toxic.

A lot of us atheists have taken some care for the future, after we die. I carry an organ-donor card. If my corneas give someone the gift of sight, my life will have had just that little bit more meaning; I’ll have done that much more good.

This, in turn, lets me feel a little better about myself now. I’m reaping the rewards in life, for something good I’ll be doing when I’m gone.

(Everyone, religious or not, gets to feel the same way regarding charity. When you give $20 to Oxfam America, you feel warm and snuggly and heroic now, even though the money won’t do anyone any good until at least a few days later.)

10

Is it common for atheists to attribute nihilism to atheists? I’ve always thought (forgive my narrow ignorance) that when peopel say they are “spirtual but not religous” they actually mean that they are a-theist but not nihilistic, because they associate nihilism with atheism.

11

I think there are a variety of ways to interpret your friend’s comment. Mine would be that atheists are selfish people who don’t really give a toss about what happens to the rest of the world as long as it doesn’t affect them. *That *seems to be a typically religious view of atheists. It’s as if they’re saying that any person with any compassion or humanity has to logically also be religious. That the one is the sine qua non for the other.

Of course more educated religious people understand such ideas as humanism and realize that being either moral, compassionate or empathetic don’t necessarily imply or require any sort of belief in the metaphysical.

12

I think you’re reading too much into what he said. Or, perhaps ironically, you are guilty of an excessively literalist reading of what he said.

If he actually believed that atheists think the world goes away when they die, he would have been surprised at you making any arranagements at all for the disposition of your estate, wouldn’t he? But he wasn’t.

What surprised him is that your arrangements included an altruistic provision that would benefit people unrelated to you, people you didn’t know, people you would never meet. He didn’t react in this way to your other arrangements, which presumably (though you don’t say this) will benefit people you know and care about.

No offence to your friend, but this doesn’t reflect terribly well on him. The implication is that, in his view, caring about people you know is natural and we all do it, but caring about people you don’t know requires an explanation. Religious belief provides a couple of possible explanations - obedience to an authoritative command, or an expectation of reward in the afterlife - but atheists can’t offer those explanations. The notion that you would seek to benefit other poeople because that’s inherently virtuous and that no further explanation is required evidently hasn’t occurred to him.

13

When I hear people say they are “spiritual but religious”, I hear “I’m having doubts about the existence of God, but I don’t want to say it out loud lest someone think I’m one of those evil, arrogant atheists.”

14

Yes! Exactly! I’ve been trying to put that into words for years. I really really hate that phrase.

I’m a non-practicing Jew, and every now and then someone will say, “oh, so you’re spiritual, but not religious.” I sometimes say, “nope, not spiritual either,” because that’s the truth. More often I just change the subject.

15

I’ve had someone say to me (more than once) “You’re an Atheist, so you don’t believe in anything.” I find that odd. Especially the idea of having no moral compass because I don’t believe in God. I feel like I have a strong moral compass because I’m Atheist. Because I don’t believe in an afterlife, I feel like this life is my one shot to get shit as right as I can, so I don’t steal shit from other people, hurt people intentionally, cheat, lie, blahblahblah. This is my only life so I try to make it as happy as I can all the way around in the here and now, not for some payoff later. This is it for me, so I try to make it count. How is that not believing in anything?

16

I’m somewhat religious, and I believe the fact that there are a lot more atheists than hedonists indicates that atheists typically care about what might happen in the world when they’re gone. If they didn’t, why would they seem to care that their actions might negatively impact people who’ll come after them? For example, I’m willing to be that there are a fair number of environmental activists who are of middle age or older who care about what happens to the environment more than 50 years from now who are also atheists.

17

I am a fundamentalist agnostic (I don’t like atheists in general) but I think there is some truth to the argument. Once I found out that about myself, I realized that I could do whatever I wanted at any time and the consequences are only ephemeral at best. Some of that didn’t work out very well and probably won’t in the future but, fuck 'em ,you only have one life to live. I also learned the hard way that pure hedonism is a path to self-destruction (although it is great in moderation).

Still, I don’t have a life philosophy similar to most people. I really only care about the happiness of my kids and my own happiness because that is the only net positive that can exist no matter how long it lasts. I don’t believe in communism, micro-communism (e.g., marriage, one-sided friendships etc.) or socialism unless I truly think I am going to get something out of it myself. I know it sounds selfish because it is but I also think it is irrational to think any other way.

I do plenty of things that seem to be selfless but they really aren’t because they make me happy. As soon as they don’t, I stop doing them. That dilemma applies to the vast majority of people. The only people that are truly selfless are the ones that hate what they are doing, don’t believe they will ever get any type of reward for it religious or otherwise and still do it anyway. How many of those saints do you know?

18

yes! this has been my experience of people’s understanding of atheism, too.

and, shagnasty, i feel similar to you, but with a more altruistic bent: if youre working only for your own happiness then odds are youre working alone in that endevour, and the fruits of your labor may be fragile and fleeting. but if your working for the benefits of others as well as yourself, youre more likely to have others working with you, and the benefits can multiply and be longer lasting!

homily over!
sorry about the hijack.

mc

19

None, because it’s not possible to do what you believe to be right, at some cost to yourself, and receive no reward for that. In all cases you’re at least getting the satisfaction and self-regard that comes from living/acting in a way that you believe to be right, from being true to your ideals, etc.

20

Maybe your teacher was a narcisist or even a soft sociopath, someone who is concerned only about himself.

Altruism and Nihilism are polar opposites.