Atheism isn’t a choice. At least for me. I don’t choose not to believe, I simply don’t. Religion does not make sense. I can’t understand all of the mental gyrations deists have to put themselves through to make themselves believe.
What irks me about TV (and books) is the “I hate god” atheist. As if the only reasonable reason not to believe is because something bad happened.
It has long been a suspicion of mine that, deep down, no one believes in gods. The believers put themselves through the charade because they need someway to make life, the universe and everything somewhat comprehensible.
It appears obvious when we observe the way their everyday lives are conducted in conjunction with their stated beliefs.
American media, maybe. I notice more favorable portrayals in European cinema. They’re godless heathens over there, bless 'em.
Nothing should be done about it. Don’t fall into the PC lib trap. Better propaganda won’t make people like you, nor will it make you feel better about yourself. As an atheist I think a lot of the media stereotypes are actually pretty accurate. Except the “angry at God” angle. That’s just dumb. But yeah, atheists tend to be cynical jerks, even if it’s a tongue in cheek sorta way. A lot can’t contain themselves around openly religious people, especially the recently converted young 20-something men who are over represented on the internet tubes. I’d rather listen to a Scientologist try to pitch an audit to me than an angry atheist rant. If anything, a lot of the media portrayals show a lot of restraint. Probably because most screen writers aren’t exactly Bible thumpers.
Something else to consider is that only 2.4% of American adults identify as atheist. I notice atheists tend to conflate atheism with non-denominational spirituality or irreligious groups to pump up the numbers and make us seem more important, or that we’re on some huge upgrowth. We’re not. We’re not particularly important or influential, nor will we be any day soon. We don’t contribute to the wider culture, outside of trolling and flamewars maybe. There’s no reason for the media to give a crap what we think.
Like the Dude said, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, at least it’s an ethos.
A while back, CNN had an hour-long program about atheists. Most of the people on the show had been religious, or had been raised religious, and had “lost” their religion. Throughout the show, references were made to “losing God,” “turning one’s back on God,” “losing faith,” “abandoning their religiion,” etc. Not just the interviewees, but the host, Kyra Phillips, consistently used these negative phrases to portray atheism as a net loss. The viewer was constantly shown families and religious communities in pain and anguish over the lost souls who had abandoned them. At no point was atheism shown to be something positive, pro-reality and pro-life. At the program’s end was a segment in which the atheists were at least portrayed as neutral and self-accepting.
It’s true that you often get religious characters in TV and movies shown in a negative light, but generally it’s not a criticism of religion but of hypocrisy and extremity in the practice of it. On the other hand, atheism is treated as though it is itself a form of hypocrisy, as though the atheist is being obtuse about what is obviously right in front of them. And then they are dismissed by throwing in at the last minute an incident we’re supposed to take as providing evidence of God’s work. And of course unlike in the real world, the TV miracles are not at all vague and being massaged by copious wishful thinking.
The argument that science doesn’t know everything, therefore P, where P is whatever the fuck you want because apparently anything goes, exposes a fundamental flaw in our education about science. When the religious try to cram what they want to believe in the epistemic space left unsatisfactorily filled by science, we call it The God of the Gaps. The problem is that insisting that God must be whatever fits in those cracks means that God is effectively diminished whenever light actually shines in those dark corners. Likewise, there’s this guy Bill Maher who purports to be an athiest, but uses an argument just like The God of the Gaps to rationalize his enthusiasm for pseudoscience in medicine.
The discipline of science requires that it is not a legitimate move to cram whatever you want to believe into gaps in knowledge. That’s why the gaps exist in scientific knowledge, because scientists require a good reason to fill them. When you move outside of areas carefully delineated reliable claims to knowledge, you have not entered a magical fairy land where all your fantasies are true, as Maher and others seem to think.
In the alternate-earth novel Anathem, instead of talking about what we call Occam’s Razor they talk about Dyax’s Rake. The idea is that an ancient philosopher named Dyax is said to have snatched up a rake and chased out of the garden people who believed in things because they wanted them to be true. We need to promote a concept like that in our world.
Dude. TV is all about networks selling eyeballs to advertisers. Why would production companies/networks make shows that go against the tide of bootlicking theists?
It’s all about the $$$$$$$ and the suckers (who are the majority) are the ones that buy the crap that is pushed in every commercial break.
(you know this)
You do know Bones and Brennan is based on a real person and her novels right? So this is a bad example because “the media” is not responsible for the way Bones is, the author is so you gotta blame the author.
I say we do an Occupy Wall Street style protesting in front of these evil media and break their windows and poop in their doorways. That’ll show em what for.
But that wasn’t God. That was the remains of a computerized space probe that collided with God. Even the remains of the computerized space probe that collided with God thought that that was probable.
Which has nothing to do with atheism. He’s written that way because he is also based on a real life person that Bill Prady knew. So again this is not the medias fault it is realitys’ fault.
Shhhhhh. Stop being rational. We’re trying to retroactively find evidence for our persecution complex.
This is the way of TV and the movies as to everyone. Lawyers are often portrayed as sleazeballs. Fathers are often bumbling idiots. Women in general are over-sexualized. Rural people and religious people are The Other (spoiler alert: whenever a southerner or a Christian is introduced at the beginning of Law & Order, they turn out to be the killer). Corporate executives have no souls, and office life is typically portrayed as torture.
This has probably been true forever; I imagine some people attended Shakespeare’s plays and came away grumbling, “knighthood’s not like that.”
The Americans - the two main protagonists Philip and Elizabeth Jennings are clearly atheist. A major thread in the series has been their daughter Paige embracing Christanity and the difficulties her parents have coping with her faith. (Ok, yes, Philip and Elizabeth are also covert communist spies, assassins and all-around shady anti-heroes, but they are NOT the stereotypical robotic automatons athiests are portrayed as.
Torchwood - This show never explicitly stated the characters were atheists, but it does make the point from episode one, scene one that there is NO afterlife. When a person dies, they are effectively “shut off” like a machine. Several characters get “reactivated” (brought back to life) and relate that there was simply nothing after their last moment. That’s it. No going through a long tunnel and being greeted by deceased family and friends, no heaven or hell, no reincarnation. (Yes the show wavered on this point a few times in certain episodes, but it would invariably re-affirm this point in a later episode.) In a way, that’s more daring than having a character express a belief in atheism - because an atheist character can always be shown (or at least hinted) to be wrong. On Torchwood, atheism is depicted as being true.
Yeah, other than religious-themed shows (a la Touched by an Angel), I don’t see a whole lot of positive portrayals of religious people on TV. Typically they are portrayed as a negative stereotype: The Judgmental Christian, The Evil Muslim, The Hypocrite, The Dotty Old Lady. The Blind Atheist fits right in the rest of these types.
Good shows, when dealing with a character’s religious beliefs or lack thereof, are sometimes more nuances. I love a show with a realistic, sympathetic atheist or a realistic, sympathetic believer - having characters of both kinds is a big plus. But most entertainment - especially TV - will avoid those topics so as to not offend anyone.
There are shows that have smart, well-adjusted atheists just as there are shows that have smart, well-adjusted priests or churchgoers. But I think we all tend to remember the portrayals of our own beliefs that annoy us and end up with a bit of confirmation bias.