I wish people would understand atheism is a philosophical point-of-view on one topic, not a worldview in any sense. It is just like nominalism, conceptualism, instrumentalism, idealism, realism, naturalism, etc ... no ethics or politics
necessarily accompany it. All it does is describe a single, isolated idea (a denial of the belief in the existence of God).
This immediately sets it apart from religions, which are accompanied by ethics at the least, and by the logic of my vocabulary politics too.
People called atheists would better be known under the umbrella "secular humanists" due to their emphasis on existential features common to all humans as a basis for morality (empathy, healthiness, and happiness versus anti-pathy, unhealthiness, and misery) and their concern only for the well-being of entities in
this world. Otherwise, religions might mistake the 'rationalistic' science-drive types with some Wiccan and Buddhist / eastern religion denominations.
Quote:
|
Most atheists do. The atheists in question however did not. Atheism in this case was an important component of their philosophy. The absence of a god contributed to the amorality that led them to perpetrate their acts.
|
A senseless point, because I could just as rightfully say it was an absence of "secular humanism" or even "common sense" as opposed to an absence of god.