Is Atheism a religion as say...Theravada Buddhism?

[KichigaiNeko]

I respectfully disagree completely. Atheism, as a general concept, is the disbelief in Gods. Anyone or thing that doesn't believe in gods is an atheist. The word literally comes from the Greek "without gods".

Thankyou capt obvious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
What piqued my interset was:

Theoretical atheism
Further information: Existence of God, Evolutionary origin of religions, and Evolutionary psychology of religion
Theoretical (or theoric) atheism explicitly posits arguments against the existence of gods, responding to common theistic arguments such as the argument from design or Pascal's Wager. The theoretical reasons for rejecting gods assume various forms, above all ontological, gnoseological, and epistemological, but also sometimes psychological and sociological forms.

So tell me, do babies not fall under this category? Do people who have never heard of the concept of God not fall under this category?

Why you asking me?? I'm not pretending to have all the answers. But for arguments' sake would it not be logical to take the position that your statement is correct in it's assumption??

What is the doctrine of atheism exactly? You say "scientific principles" and I call bullshit on this. There are many atheists who do not accept science, many who still follow horoscopes and other pseudoscientific crap, many who are "new age" people yet still profess no belief in a higher being.

All too true just as there are many Atheists that are religious and varying shades in between... as you point out. The major trend though is that Atheism is and does rely on science and scientific principles of evidence when arguing it's position. Is this not so?? There are many theists who follow that "pseudoscientific crap" too. So what??

There are no tenets of atheism. One does not have to actively believe that there are no gods (positive atheism) to be an atheist. To be an atheist, you don't have to follow any specific rules, you just have to fall under a certain category, and that category is "not having a belief in a god".

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/at...ligion.htm

Atheism is a disbelief, not a philosophy. My disbelief in the Tooth Fairy is not a philosophy of life - is it for anyone else? Furthermore, a philosophy of life is not necessarily a religion and it doesn't necessitate that a religious belief exists in the person with the philosophy.

Dawkins is no more a prophet of atheism than Pat Robertson is a prophet of Christianity. Religions revolve around their prophets, yet there is nothing in the definition of atheism that even makes mention of Dawkins, there are even atheists (such as myself) who disagree with most of what he says. Popularisers of X do not equate prophets of X, and to say so is completely ridiculous.

Are you sure mandy?? I would envisage the early christians were no different with their "prophets" not to mention the Jews.

What view of the Cosmos does atheism have? None! Atheists themselves might have some view of the cosmos, but it isn't prescribed by atheism. Look at Scientologists...they *are* atheists by definition, yet they believe the universe is 15 trillion years old and Zenu is the supreme commander responsible for human suffering.

Again I would say that atheists do have a view of the cosmos happily provided by science. Look at your own avatar for example.

As I've argued before, atheism and theism are not religions, they are individual beliefs. They may form the core of several religions, but to say they are religions themselves is simply irrational and ill-informed.

I would argue that you appear to have a very simplistic narrow view of just what constitutes a religion, religious "practice", belief systems and beliefs. I do not think I am ill-informed and it could be argued that right wing conservitism is irrational. So what??
My own life experience has led me to conclude that of the 6Billion people on the planet there are 6Billion religions and no two are EXACTLY the same, practiced the same, support the same tenets nor give the exact same comfort to each individual. I would also put forward that 'religion' is not used exclusively for belief systems as any MotorGP, F1 enthusiast can attest. So much can be viewed as a 'religion' and it can also be said that atheism is just another one.

You can take the greatest theory, define it, map it all out and the minute you add people it goes all to mush.

At the end of the day no-one really gives a tinkers cuss. It's all personal.

For your reading pleasure...just a few of the sites I read regarding this topic. hock:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/smith.htm

http://www.religionfacts.com/big_religion_chart.htm Comparisons at a glance.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topi...te-reality

...enjoy