[Serious] Atheist Dogma

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of god beliefs. I was born without any beliefs in gods or the supernatural. That makes me, by definition, an atheist. 

What do you call someone who wasn't religious enough to consider themself an atheist?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of god beliefs. I was born without any beliefs in gods or the supernatural. That makes me, by definition, an atheist. 

What do you call someone who wasn't religious enough to consider themself an atheist?

'George Pell'.

Boru

[Gawdzilla Sama]

What do you call someone who wasn't religious enough to consider themself an atheist?

'George Pell'.

Boru

Don't recall him.

[Belacqua]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of god beliefs. I was born without any beliefs in gods or the supernatural. That makes me, by definition, an atheist. 

I think we're all born without belief in any gods. That kind of belief has to be taught. 

But if I'm understanding the OP at all, he has a point. Just because we're born without a certain belief doesn't mean that it's the default position for everyone to remain without it. Everyone is born a blank (more or less) and everyone is taught how the world works. 

An analogy with Chomsky on language is maybe useful here. Everyone is born without language, but it is natural for that gap to be filled. Remaining without language is not a default position, though which language we take in depends on when and where we are. To say that we are born without a system for explaining the world and therefore it is the default to remain without one would be wrong, I think. There is something in the mind which evolved to take in explanations. Which explanation we take in -- a religious one or a non-religious one -- depends on when and where we are. 

And there are kids who are taught religion early on, but are also taught the tools to reject it.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

'George Pell'.

Boru

Don't recall him.

The Australian child-molesting-paedophile-protecting cardinal who recently had his conviction overturned.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of god beliefs. I was born without any beliefs in gods or the supernatural. That makes me, by definition, an atheist. 

I think we're all born without belief in any gods. That kind of belief has to be taught. 

But if I'm understanding the OP at all, he has a point. Just because we're born without a certain belief doesn't mean that it's the default position for everyone to remain without it. Everyone is born a blank (more or less) and everyone is taught how the world works. 

An analogy with Chomsky on language is maybe useful here. Everyone is born without language, but it is natural for that gap to be filled. Remaining without language is not a default position, though which language we take in depends on when and where we are. To say that we are born without a system for explaining the world and therefore it is the default to remain without one would be wrong, I think. There is something in the mind which evolved to take in explanations. Which explanation we take in -- a religious one or a non-religious one -- depends on when and where we are. 

And there are kids who are taught religion early on, but are also taught the tools to reject it.

I think that’s a fair assessment. If you’ll forgive yet another analogy, we can think of it like a bucket. A bucket starts out empty, but can be filled or emptied later on.

One might say that a newborn is atheist by default, but an adult is atheist by conscious choice (in most cases).

Boru

[ignoramus]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of god beliefs. I was born without any beliefs in gods or the supernatural. That makes me, by definition, an atheist. 

What do you call someone who wasn't religious enough to consider themself an atheist?

Ignostic.
On a practical level, I think most atheists are ignostic.
Mainly because we don't even know what an accurate description of a "god" actually is.
We can't disbelieve something foggy
Theists have a far more accurate description, the problem is each person has a different description. A personal one for a personal god.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

What do you call someone who wasn't religious enough to consider themself an atheist?

Ignostic.
On a practical level, I think most atheists are ignostic.
Mainly because we don't even know what an accurate description of a "god" actually is.
We can't disbelieve something foggy
Theists have a far more accurate description, the problem is each person has a different description. A personal one for a personal god.

But I didn't consider religion at all. It effectively only existed with other people. I didn't have a faith or an anti-faith. I was just happy.

[ignoramus]

That's how I and 95% of Australia feels.
If it wasn't for our Anglo churches being classified as historic, they'd be knocked down.
I don't remember one being built in my 56 years!
Then again, mosques are a different story. For some reason, us xenophobic Aussies would prefer a nuclear power station being built next door than a mosque. Go figure.

And if I can clarify, that evil cunt who killed those innocent people in NZ was just sick in the head, irrespective of nationality.

[Fake Messiah]

Religion could be one of the false beliefs that piggybacks on evolution.

Take yourself in a position of our ancestors who mostly lived in nature among wild animals and if you hear a rustle in the bushes, you’re more likely to survive (or get food) if you believe it came from another animal or a monster than from a gust of wind. These beliefs about conscious agents in nature can easily be transferred to things like lightning and earthquakes. Because our ancestors lacked naturalistic explanations for such things, conjectures about supernatural humanlike beings or spirits might follow.

So our evolved cognitive apparatus gives us a propensity to accept religious propositions such as God, the afterlife, and the soul, and those specific beliefs are learned.
Therefore it’s no surprise that children in India come to believe in multiple deities, while those in Alabama in the divinity of Jesus.

So it is a feature that, while sometimes useful, was not itself the object of natural selection, but piggybacked on features that evolved for other reasons.

Remember, there is no gene for God.