Atheism isn't a worldview, but

[Epimethean]

Religion isn't a world view anymore, either, but unlike atheism, it has outlived its usefulness and now causes far more problems than it solves with its sweeping, dogmatic judgments.

Religion = dinosaur

Atheism = paleontology

[Fred]

Why would you want to shoehorn a "world view" onto atheism Fred??

I wouldn't and haven't. Atheism isn't a worldveiw. That's the point and that's why you can't say they are this and that with any accuracy and why so many scream when you do. But the same goes for lots of religious folks, too.

Whether you are a particular religion or none, the worldview is the next level down, the ground you are standing on watching the world go by.

---

Atheism is only a view on the existance or not of a god or gods. It has nothing to say on anything else.

Exactly. This is true, but the trouble comes in when the atheist then starts ascribing worldview stuff to atheism or a fundie does it for them. That's the source of the confusion and friction and leads to folks talking right past each other because they start speaking in tongues so to speak.

It irks me when people say 'you are an atheist therefore you believe this'

Sure. This is exactly what I'm talking about. I feel the same way when I say I'm not an atheist, and everybody rushes to fit me with labels that don't belong.

That's why I started the thread, because it gets really interesting when you look under the hood as it were. Its not so much the atheist/theist stuff that produces the gridlock nearly as much as it's the worldviews.

Athesim only means that we dont believe in god, there is no other requirement to being an atheist.

Right. Except for all the time you use it and have it used against you for other issues as well, and that's the worldview war.

We dont have to believe in the scientific process many do but it is not in fact part of atheism.

Yup. It's part of the rational worldview.

That people did not believe was mentioned in the bible and the scientific process was not around at that time.

Right again. And there are atheists in the relativist camp who don't believe in God but really have a hair up their ass about science, too.

Did atheists then share our 'world view'?

Yes. No.

I think not I think they just DID NOT BELIEVE IN GOD.

Right. And whatever else they believed in based on their particular worldview in that sphere.

Gods, silly idea that belongs in the past.

Ok, this is the heart of the Old Wine post, sans the flowers. The belief in a mythic god may be no longer the dominant meme on the scientific/academic level, but the worldview itself may have developed in the past, but it isn't discarded. You bring it along with you to the next level of development. Once you see how the worldviews roll and what their chief characteristics are, you can see their footprints all over the place. The cool thing about it is that it helps make the totally batshit crazy stuff a little less totally batshit crazy because at least you know how someone could get to that position.

---

. . . It springs from one of the three currently at culture war,

No.

Atheism is but a response to the theistic claims about the existence of god as unproven, hasn't sufficiently met its burden of proof, or that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny at all.

Sigh. Of course. But look at your response. That's where the worldview is located. Unproven, burden of proof, stand up to scrutiny. Those are hallmarks of the rational pov. That's what I mean by springs from. Atheism isn't a worldview, but it is informed and shaped by one.

Picture all the religions, dogmas and worldviews in the world as all the different colours of the rainbow. Now imagine that Atheism is black. Black is not a colour, it is an absence of colour. A lack of something does not a cognitive orientation of society make.

We can put away the bald is not a hair color sheet music, as we all know the tune by heart. This is why the discussions get so off track so quickly, not just here, but everywhere. What you are saying is obviously correct on one level, yet none of that is to the issue about the worldviews.

---

Religion isn't a world view anymore, either, but unlike atheism, it has outlived its usefulness and now causes far more problems than it solves with its sweeping, dogmatic judgments.

You mean sweeping dogmatic judgments of the type you just made there, or some other kind of sweeping dogmatic judgments?

See? The core of the mythic worldview is alive and kicking.

[Welsh cake]

We can put away the bald is not a hair color sheet music, as we all know the tune by heart. This is why the discussions get so off track so quickly, not just here, but everywhere. What you are saying is obviously correct on one level, yet none of that is to the issue about the worldviews.

Fred, I don't know how else I'm supposed to explain it to you. You seem to have some kind of mental block here that is preventing you from appreciating that while you're broadly addressing worldviews, atheism is not one of those, it is a response to claims about god or gods. Nothing more.

My atheism says nothing about what I do believe in.

[Fred]

We can put away the bald is not a hair color sheet music, as we all know the tune by heart. This is why the discussions get so off track so quickly, not just here, but everywhere. What you are saying is obviously correct on one level, yet none of that is to the issue about the worldviews.

Fred, I don't know how else I'm supposed to explain it to you. You seem to have some kind of mental block here that is preventing you from appreciating that while you're broadly addressing worldviews, atheism is not one of those,

I don't see how you can say I'm missing this point when it's right there in the title of the thread.

My atheism says nothing about what I do believe in.

No, but your worldview speaks volumes, just like with everyone else, which is what this is about, not atheism.

[Epimethean]

Fred, your worldview is in need of dusting.

[The Grand Nudger]

You're wasting your "gifts" here Fred. Like I said, you need to establish an ashram. The rest of your mystic buddies have already hit on this and you may as well be part of it, because otherwise you're just a mark. I stand by Brihaspati.

There is no heaven, no final liberation, nor any soul in another world,
Nor do the actions of the four castes, order, &c, produce any real effect,
The Agnihotra, the three Vedas, the ascetic's three staves, and smearing oneself with ashes,
Brihaspati says, these are but means of livelihood for those who have no manliness nor sense.
-
Hence it is only as a means of livelihood that Brahmans have established here
all these ceremonies for the dead, there is no other fruit anywhere.

Amusingly your brahman buddies, after all that inclusivity shit they spout, took one look at that and decided to exclude it from the canon. Fucking typical.

[searchingforanswers]

Why didnt you just start a thread asking everyone what their worldview was? I really dont get the point of attacking what Atheism is when everyone has defined it a billion times already.

[Erinome]

According to his post on Lunchbox's thread, Fred believes that there are only 3 worldviews. If that were presented to me as fact, the fact would have to be that the only people left on earth were Fred, some unfortunate individual, and me. There is no other way I would ever believe it otherwise. Everyone's perspective and perception of the world is different. They might have things in common with multitudes of other folks, but somewhere in there, there is something that is different.

Atheism isn't a worldview, but...

But what, Fred?

[The Grand Nudger]

The cobbled together ramblings of thousands of years of witch doctors have given Fred access to otherwise hidden knowledge. Don't feel bad if you don't get it Alei.

---

Mythic, rational,

I'd love to see how those two are compatible, BTW. Gonna take some hefty swings with the old axe of redefinition.

[Skepsis]

It's good to know that nobody else understands what he is getting at either. I can't find what his point is, even after the close examination of his first post.

Is he trying to establish that there are only 3 world views? Is he trying to say that atheists have to be rationalists?

Mythics and rationalists are not compatable, btw. Opposite views.