If the whole world were atheist...

[Tarvos]

Yeah but you have to take into account what the positives of cars, buildings and perhaps dogs are, and then those of religion.

Religion pales in comparison.

 

[Abwayax]

Well, sure, religious wars wouldn't happen without religion.

However, atheists are by no means a unified front. There are no rules of atheism and no accepted beliefs or values. The only thing atheists agree on is that there might not be a God, although some are more strong in that belief than others. Atheism doesn't require a lack of spiritualty or a doctrine of science-worship, either.

 

[nastypass]

However, atheists are by no means a unified front. There are no rules of atheism and no accepted beliefs or values. The only thing atheists agree on is that there might not be a God, although some are more strong in that belief than others. Atheism doesn't require a lack of spiritualty or a doctrine of science-worship, either.

...so?

 

[Abwayax]

...so?

Well, the implication that I seem to be getting from some arguments is that if "everyone were atheist" there'd be drastically less conflict because somehow we'd all agree with (almost) everyone about (almost) everything, which probably wouldn't really the case. Atheism isn't a belief system like a religion is, so there's bound to be some sort of conflict.

Humanity's injustices against humanity don't come from God, they come from (surprise!) humanity.

 

[opaltiger]

Well, the implication that I seem to be getting from some arguments is that if everyone were "atheist" there'd be drastically less conflict because somehow we'd all agree with (almost) everyone about (almost) everything, which probably wouldn't really the case. "Atheism" isn't a belief system like a religion is, so there's bound to be some sort of conflict.

Humanity's injustices against humanity don't come from God, they come from (surprise!) humanity.

Why are you putting atheism in scare quotes?

 

[Abwayax]

They weren't really intended as scare quotes. I think I meant to put quotes around the entire phrase.

Atheism is a very broad concept, which really only means that a person does not believe in a god (and even then, to what degree they disbelieve in a god can differ from person to person). But some people seem to be saying things like "atheists do science and religious people don't" which is way off the mark, and some people go further in suggesting that belief in a god is what ultimately drives a significant amount of crimes against humanity. Atheism does not imply any sort of intellectual or moral superiority, at least in a world where everyone agrees with you on that point.

True, there seems to be consensus that atheists actually are smarter than religious people (for some values of "smarter"), but that's generally attiributed to the fact that religion is the default in a good number of societies and it takes some extra-critical thinking to "break out" of that mode of thought. Logically, this would not apply to a world in which atheism was the norm.

 

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

Well, the implication that I seem to be getting from some arguments is that if "everyone were atheist" there'd be drastically less conflict because somehow we'd all agree with (almost) everyone about (almost) everything, which probably wouldn't really the case. Atheism isn't a belief system like a religion is, so there's bound to be some sort of conflict.

Humanity's injustices against humanity don't come from God, they come from (surprise!) humanity.

There would be drastically less conflict. There'd be a thousand and one less things to fight about.

 

[Music Dragon]

So would we call ourselves the Unified Atheist League, the United Atheist Alliance, or the Allied Atheist Alliance?

 

[1. Luftballon]

I don't think it really matters that much how many things there are to fight about, than the degree.

 

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

I don't think it really matters that much how many things there are to fight about, than the degree.

The degree of what exactly? And of course the amount of things to fight about matters. If there are ten thousand reasons that two people could start a fight, then they're more likely to start a fight than two people who only have five thousand reasons they could start a fight.

 

[GameFreakerZero]

There would be drastically less conflict. There'd be a thousand and one less things to fight about.

There would be one thing people wouldn't fight about; "you don't believe in my god". Don't think the lack of belief in deities would make everyone follow the same creed, even among religions there are sects and even in an atheist world there would be different societies with different ways of ruling things that they would disagree on. People would still have the potential to be racist and arrogant and hideous to each other without a god, the same way they have the potential to be courteous, pleasant and understanding without one.

 

[Phantom]

People would still have the potential to be racist and arrogant and hideous to each other without a god, the same way they have the potential to be courteous, pleasant and understanding without one.

So you're saying it doesn't matter? I think end of the line is humanity isn't perfect, people are going to fight and argue, but one less or multiple less reasons to fight is always a good thing no matter what.


If you're going to bring the pros and cons of religion I believe that the cons will outweigh pros due to the facts of multiple wars, mass suicide, genocide, etc. that are attributed to religion.


But on the mention of racism a lot of it has basis in religion. Just saying.

 

[GameFreakerZero]

So you're saying it doesn't matter? I think end of the line is humanity isn't perfect, people are going to fight and argue, but one less or multiple less reasons to fight is always a good thing no matter what.

I don't think one less excuse to fight would radically change human history as some people seem to be implying. We would just use another excuse to do the same sorts of things to each other and I imagine leaders would press nationalism as the reason rather than god.

Changes in human society would occur for various other reasons regarding the loss of religion but I think there's a dangerous implication in what people are saying about how getting rid of religion would stop people fighting, even if the phrase "as much" is after that.

If you're going to bring the pros and cons of religion I believe that the cons will outweigh pros due to the facts of multiple wars, mass suicide, genocide, etc. that are attributed to religion.

And? I'm not arguing the pros and cons of religion, that's irrelevant to the discussion. Its significance in creating those? I think mass suicide is the only thing that would be notably reduced with the loss of a deity. War and genocide would still happen for different reasons and probably to an equal extent.

But on the mention of racism a lot of it has basis in religion. Just saying.

No it doesn't.
It has basis in our psychology and it can be excused and propogated by religion. In a world without religion racism would be just as much used as a reason to fight those people we don't like over there as it has been in this one, perhaps moreso as there's no difference in religions to use as a reason instead.

 

[1. Luftballon]

The degree of what exactly? And of course the amount of things to fight about matters. If there are ten thousand reasons that two people could start a fight, then they're more likely to start a fight than two people who only have five thousand reasons they could start a fight.

if they have ten thousand tolerable things to fight over, they're still less likely to fight than if they had a single significant and intolerable disagreement.

and if they have ten thousand and one significant and intolerable disagreements, taking away ten thousand of them isn't going to stop them from fighting.

 

[Phantom]

And? I'm not arguing the pros and cons of religion, that's irrelevant to the discussion.

You didn't mention it and I never said you did. I think someone else did. Just because I quoted you earlier in the post does not mean it's all referring to you.

No it doesn't.

Yes it does. *feels like a four year old*

There's something called institutional racism; apologies that I did not clarify that. It's also known as structural racism or systemic racism. I suggest you look up things before you say them.

It has basis in our psychology and it can be excused and propogated by religion.

Yes it does have a base in psychology as well, but the fact is that there are times (have been times), and do not deny that, religion was the means to racism.

There are multiple forms of racism, and I believe that you are focusing on racial discrimination.

In a world without religion racism would be just as much used as a reason to fight those people we don't like over there as it has been in this one, perhaps moreso as there's no difference in religions to use as a reason instead.

There will always be fighting; I've never denied that. At least people won't be blowing themselves and others up in the name of their god, or even their version of the same god.

 

[shy ♡]

There's no reason for there to be less war if there weren't religion. There would just be less of an excuse. Not that it's really an excuse, and I'm sure we'd come up with an alternative one.

Wars stem from primitive instincts. Territorialism, the desire to fight/kill/hunt, to protect what you own or what you love, greed. These things are not dependent on religion.

 

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

There would be one thing people wouldn't fight about; "you don't believe in my god". Don't think the lack of belief in deities would make everyone follow the same creed, even among religions there are sects and even in an atheist world there would be different societies with different ways of ruling things that they would disagree on. People would still have the potential to be racist and arrogant and hideous to each other without a god, the same way they have the potential to be courteous, pleasant and understanding without one.

Thank you for stating the completely obvious. Shockingly, as an atheist, I'm perfectly aware that atheism isn't a united belief, probably because atheism is the lack of a belief, not a belief in itself. I'm a total skeptic and my girlfriend believes in magic; we're both atheist. I'm not denying that there are still things that people would fight about, I'm just saying that there would be less things that people would fight about.

if they have ten thousand tolerable things to fight over, they're still less likely to fight than if they had a single significant and intolerable disagreement.

and if they have ten thousand and one significant and intolerable disagreements, taking away ten thousand of them isn't going to stop them from fighting.

That's a drastic oversimplification and the logic is fallacious. That implies that any two people necessarily have the same set of things that they would fight with someone else over and that any two people feel about those things to the same extent. Also, if there's only one thing, then when those people are in contact, they'll only fight if that one thing comes up. However, if there are ten thousand things, then if any of those things come up, they will fight.

In other words, if two people have a 1% chance of broaching the one thing that would make them fight, then two people who have a thousand things that would make them fight, there's probably a higher chance that they would broach one of those topics and then fight.

There's no reason for there to be less war if there weren't religion. There would just be less of an excuse. Not that it's really an excuse, and I'm sure we'd come up with an alternative one.

Wars stem from primitive instincts. Territorialism, the desire to fight/kill/hunt, to protect what you own or what you love, greed. These things are not dependent on religion.

You seem to be implying that people fight wars only for the reasons you listed and that religion is simply an excuse but that's totally false; you say that protecting what you own or what you love is a reason to go to war, well people feel that they own their religion, don't they? They love their religion, don't they? Religion is a motivation for conflict in of itself, therefore religious conflicts would never have happened if religion hadn't ever existed.

However, that's not strictly relevant because the question says "atheist" not "areligious". Buddhists are atheists.

Furthermore, it is totally impossible to gauge whether or not there would be less war because societal development would have gone completely differently without theism. Seriously, we can't even comprehend how different it would be and it is near-pointless for someone who hasn't studied sociology in-depth to even attempt to contemplate an atheistic history.

 

[GameFreakerZero]

Yes it does. *feels like a four year old*

There's something called institutional racism; apologies that I did not clarify that. It's also known as structural racism or systemic racism. I suggest you look up things before you say them.

Yes it does have a base in psychology as well, but the fact is that there are times (have been times), and do not deny that, religion was the means to racism.

I'm not saying that religion isn't a reason used for racism, I'm saying that at its core racism isn't a religious construct but a societal and psychological one and as such it would be just as prevelant in an atheist world.

There will always be fighting; I've never denied that. At least people won't be blowing themselves and others up in the name of their god, or even their version of the same god.

No, they will be killing each other in the name of their countries and because those people over there are different from them.

Thank you for stating the completely obvious. Shockingly, as an atheist, I'm perfectly aware that atheism isn't a united belief, probably because atheism is the lack of a belief, not a belief in itself. I'm a total skeptic and my girlfriend believes in magic; we're both atheist. I'm not denying that there are still things that people would fight about, I'm just saying that there would be less things that people would fight about.

No you said there would be drastically less conflict and there wouldn't be. It would be just as comparable to the amount of conflict we have because they'd still be people at their core, even if they didn't have a deity.

 

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

No you said there would be drastically less conflict and there wouldn't be. It would be just as comparable to the amount of conflict we have because they'd still be people at their core, even if they didn't have a deity.

Read the rest of the post you quoted, I explain why there would be less conflict.

 

[Abwayax]

There would be one thing people wouldn't fight about; "you don't believe in my god".

Which isn't even entirely true, because the three Abrahamic religions (collectively over 50% of the world, and hence the ones that spring to mind whenever "religion" is mentioned) all have the same god. They even revere many of the same prophets and holy figures. It even seems, at the base level, these three religions are more similar than they are different. So what have they to fight over?