Why do atheists follow false beliefs?

Atheists claim religion is false. Fine. But, to stay consistent they shouldn't follow any false beliefs. Any yet, they do. This seems rather hypocritical. For example, there is no natural law that deems all men free and equal. And yet, most atheists accept democracy despite that convenient fiction. Another example, most atheists believe murder is wrong. Yet, in the animal kingdom participants are constantly murdered. Another convenient falsehood they readily follow. What's the rationale for this inconsistency?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Everybody creates false centers to be confortable with their beliefs. A false center could be your career, profession, loved ones; all the stuff that can be considered your "attachments" are your false centers; all stored in the ego.
Who says atheists are the ones who have it wrong? Some atheists are righter than many theists and viceversa.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Atheists get on their soap box about religion, and yet, they follow many false beliefs themselves. It seems rather discriminatory and childish. Don't tell your neighbor to take a speck out of his eye, until you remove the log from your own.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Some atheists do that yes, and some theists do that just as much.

 

Yes, but why do most atheists center their attack on religion to the exclusion of other false beliefs?

 

There isn't some doctrine that is written specifically for the atheist. Indeed, being an atheist doesn't automatically guarantee that a person is going to be good or bad. It only describes their lack of belief in supernatural magic and superstition with regard to gods. There are atheists that believe in a whole host of weird things, such as other forms of magic, UFOs, aliens, Bigfoot, ESP, tarot cards, astrology, etc.

So whenever I see someone deluded with the superstitions of religion question what an atheist believes, I automatically realize that this person is informed by logical fallacy and assumption that their own delusion is the correct worldview.

But, with regard to most atheists that I know, their behaviors and societal interactions are governed by reason and general humanist philosophy. The Christians think that their "golden rule" is informed by their god, when in reality it has been a part of human nature for a far longer period of time.

So while you're going on about the "false beliefs" of atheists, you've yet to really identify any false beliefs and you've completely succumbed to the logical fallacy of the non sequitur in failing to realize that being an atheist doesn't guarantee reason and humanist thought. It only describes the lack of belief in gods. Something you should appreciate since you're an atheist about every other god but your own.

 

You should be more specific about which atheists and which false beliefs.

 

Humanism is a false belief. Practicing the Golden Rule can get you killed real fast. Look at how fast the Romans killed Jesus.

 

Are you serious ? Whats the point of the question ??
Sounds to me you are trying to provoke, your reasoning doesnt make any sense at all.

 

If you agree that it is a worthy idea for all people to be free and equal, then that belief is not false. It's based on what you think is good for humanity. It's a belief based on reason. There's nothing inconsistent about it.

Humanism isn't something that can be declared true or false. It's a social strategy. If someday we think of a better idea, we will consider that, too.

 

What, specifically, is demonstrably false about humanism?

 

Of course the idea that all people are free and equal is false. The animal world does not evidence this belief. If that were true, animals wouldn't kill each other or dominate each other. Evolution is based on survival of the fitest - not survival of all as free and equal partners. Although democracy is a great idea, it is not based on our genetic makeup or ideas of evolution. It is a man made idea, which is false in the sense that it only works if we all believe it.

 

Humanism asserts that knowledge of right and wrong is based on one's best understanding of one's individual and joint interests. Any yet, in evolutionary terms, it is survival of the fitest - not survival of the most diplomatic. The cruel but strong often survive to reproduce - leaving the diplomat dead on the ground. Humanism is a false belief in terms of evolution.

 

Evolution is not simply survival of the fittest. Cooperative behavior is at least as rewarded as predatory behavior.

If I believed that all people ARE free and equal, there would be no need to believe in this as a moral code. In fact, I believe all people SHOULD be free and equal. This is a more subjective statement.

In fact, animal groups are true democracies. Although you might think a deer herd is controlled by the dominant male, this is false. In reality, when more than 50% of the herd decide to do something, then they all do it. The same applies to flocks of birds and fish. You cannot find a more true democracy than those found in nature.

Democracy beats despotism in the animal world

 

I can see how this concept might be upsetting to the bigot, bent on maintaining the hierarchy and order of his own ethic, racial or like-minded group, but the humanists ground values in human welfare shaped by human circumstances, interests, and concerns and extended to the global ecosystem and beyond. We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.

Surely, you aren't a bigot?

To the under-educated, "fitness" often refers to "superiority," or a dominion of one race or species over another. However, this simply isn't true. Clearly the cockroach is more fit to the world than humans, a relatively new species on the planet. But humanity is separate (not necessarily superior or more "fit") than the rest of the animal kingdom in that we are aware of our fitness and lack thereof to the extent that we can modify ourselves and our environment to adapt. Moreover, humanity has the capacity to establish morals and societal expectations that overcome animalistic needs for survival by preying on each other. Humanism, therefore, is an appropriate worldview which is not limited to just the atheist. There do exist Christian humanists.

Progressive cultures have worked to free humanity from the brutalities of mere survival and to reduce suffering, improve society, and develop global community. We seek to minimize the inequities of circumstance and ability, and we support a just distribution of nature’s resources and the fruits of human effort so that as many as possible can enjoy a good life.

Humanists are concerned for the well being of all, are committed to diversity, and respect those of differing yet humane views. We work to uphold the equal enjoyment of human rights and civil liberties in an open, secular society and maintain it is a civic duty to participate in the democratic process and a planetary duty to protect nature’s integrity, diversity, and beauty in a secure, sustainable manner.

But when one begins speaking of false beliefs, and one happens to be speaking from a Judeo-Christian perspective, one is hypocritical since Judeo-Christian mythology is replete with all manner of superstition (false beliefs).

 

Interesting article, but the article itself notes its own holes.

 

Humanism sounds great. But, how is it instinctual such that one could argue it is a true belief? Isn't humanism purely a man made idea?

 

Following your logic, there should be no bee hives or and colonies - each individual bug should be fighting for itself, right?

The answer, of course, is that in a society people are more likely to survive and reproduce if they work together and help each other. Thus, working together and helping each other can be naturally selected for. It won't always be, but it's a valid strategy.

 

If that were true, then we should all be taking turns having sex with the best looking mate. Now, evolution just doesn't work that way, does it?

 

Yes, it's a man-made idea. So what?

But that's what we do!