Atheism

[123everton]

What good has atheism done for the world?

[123everton]

lol

[Octavius]

Some of them are my best friends.

It gives religionists a voice. Without atheists we would have nobody to question us and strengthen our faith. Every time I see a post on here it makes me question my belief and helps me to understand myself more and more. I like the fact they are interested in talking about my religion and pose challenging questions that test our integrity. Some even provide enlightenment and intelligence that transcends religion, especially when we talk of the big bang, evolution, history and dinosaurs. All these things fascinate me as much they do atheists or anyone else with spiritual and scientific interests.

[123everton]

Ok, democracy only works when faced with opposition it's true.
But what great bodies of work have been motivated by atheism?

[Octavius]

Well thats a different question.

Can the works of Richard Dawkins be defined as 'great'?

[QueenOfAmber]

I agree. Atheism hasn't done anything for us. It's the plain truth. :)

[123everton]

I repect Dawkins as a clever man.
But if he is the pin up boy for atheism then make me a Christian! LOL
He looks so po-faced and miserable all the time, he has the pale skinned purse lipped complexion of a man with chronic constipation, I just cannot imagine Richard Dawkins as ever having had a really good relaxing poo.
Added to that anyone who can walk up to a sick person in Lourdes and say "are you feeling better now?" lacks a certain degree of compassion, so much for humanism.

[WaldoMcFroog]

Even if nothing good had ever come from atheism (big assumption), it would tell us nothing important about whether or not the central premise was true, so the question has no significant value.

[naomi24]

Waldo, here, here.

[Octavius]

So in grand scheme of things, it is ineffectual then?

[WaldoMcFroog]

I'm genuinely struggling to get my head around what you're trying to get at with that question, Octavius.

Since when did we determine the truth of something by measuring the amount of good it does in the world?

[jake-the-peg]

Atheism has dispelled superstition.

It is lack of faith in priests that first drove modern scientific medecine - otherwise we'd still be chanting prayers and spells around peoples bedsides.

The refusal to simply accept religious doctrine has driven scientific investigation from Galileo through Darwin to present day Cosmology.

It wasn't always called atheism - Gallileo wasn't an "Athiest" you'd have been executed for giving yourself that moniker in his day.

But proper athiesm has been greatly responsible for breaking the hold of the church - especially in places like France where people like Emile Zola said

"Civilisation will not have achieved perfection until the last stone from the last church falls on the last priest"

[China Doll]

Personally I think it brought rationality to the very murky subject of religion. Every time we challenge each other, both faiths are tested and strengthened. For me, every time you assert your reasons for believing in a deity I do a little inward roll of the eyes and become more certain one doesn't exist.

You could say we prop each other up! :c)

[China Doll]

Also... What harm has it done? I suspect the same question couldn't be asked of religion.

[Octavius]

I would agree with you China, but it seems from above (Waldo, correct me if I'm wrong) that nothing important is achieved by it.

[China Doll]

I think Jake might have put that little idea to bed now Octavius. Think I'm going to follow his trail of thought on this... Modern medicine doesn't owe much to religion as for years christianity wouldn't let us cut people open so subsequently we were wandering around completely out of (all 4) of our humours. When the scientific community were finally able to do this most basic of explorations medicine started to come on in leaps and bounds.

That's gotta be one for the athiests surely?

(Although not all in the science community are athiests I hasten to add).

[WaldoMcFroog]

Yes, Jake has answered the question.

I didn't answer it because it's irrelevant to whether (or not) atheism is true and therefore don't see the value in the question. One shouldn't become an atheist (or, indeed, adopt a faith-based point of view) because of behavioural outcomes arising from it.

[chakka35]

Naturally I fully agree with jake and China, it being a truly noble thing to use reason to break the hold that mindless superstition has had on people for millennia.

But then, why should a mere, commonsense refusal to believe in a supernatural being be required to have 'done something' anyway?

What has my non-belief in Tarot Cards (crystal balls/astrology/spaghetti monsters/ palmistry/ spiritualism, etc.) done for the world?

As for Dawkins,123everton, I think you should read more of his books. You'll then learn that he is a very humane fellow with a great sense of humour and a deep love of humanity. (And why shouldn't he challenge the cruel exploitation of sick people that the RC Church practices at shrines like Lourdes?)

At any rate I reckon he's a few notches above a bloke who uses disgusting scatology to insult him.