ORIGIN OF ATHEIST PRIDE

We have everything to be proud about when declaring our atheism.

Above all, this is because we hold the intellectual high ground in being RIGHT.



Atheism is the rational and only correct way to observe and interpret Life and the Universe.

By contrast, the religious pitifully prostrate themselves at the level of the intellectual low ground because—often through little initial fault of their own, having been indoctrinated when young—they are not aware that religion is the mistaken, indeed bogus, way with which to regard the universe and its splendorous life.

Atheism is not a belief. It is the default situation into which every innocent is born.

Religion is something imposed on children’s initially-free mentality by the perverse will of elders, whether parents, school, church, synagogue or mosque.

One does not need to be a scientist to understand and agree to the atheistic viewpoint. What is needed is commonsense and a readiness to accept the results of what millions of elite scientists have discovered during the course of their hundreds of millions of experiments, particularly those carried out in the last two centuries.

The world can be proud of the history of its scientific achievements, all of which steadfastly point to an ancient universe and a neo-Darwinian interpretation of the story of Life and Humanity.

Sadly, we accept that most religionists will never give in. Their prejudiced minds are made up. They will not absorb knowledge that is new to them.

Just as we loudly proclaim our atheistic world view, we can look at the religious with pity as they humble themselves and grovel before their imaginary gods that exist nowhere but inside their heads.

Tags: atheism, atheist pride, commonsense, intelligence, life, religion, universe

Views: 962

Replies to This Discussion

I'd like to add something about the role of philosophy. The origins of atheism are bound up with the origins of philosophical thinking. At present most of famous philosophers in the analitic tradition are in fact atheists, for example Dennett, Searl, Chalmers, Quine, P. Singer, Davidson, Mackie. Science don't need any god to explain the universe. The rational philosophy has arguments against the existence of god. They are both important for atheism.
Yes, and there were Greeks thinking similarly 2500 years ago. Here are two Early Greek quotes from a book that I am writing.

(1) Heraclitus (535-475 BC): “The universal cosmic process was not created by any god or man.”

(2) Xenophanes of Colophon (570-480 BC)
[this translation is by B. Diels-Kranz]
“The Ethiops say that their gods are flat-nosed and black,
While the Thracians say that theirs have blue eyes and red hair.
Yet if cattle or horses or lions had hands and could draw,
And could sculpture like men, then the horses would draw their gods
Like horses, and cattle like cattle; and each they would shape
Bodies of gods in the likeness, each kind, of their own.”
Ah, Don, the book will not be about any aspect of the philosophy of atheism. Instead, it will strongly support, and set out, the reality of the atheistic universe and populated uninformed world in which we live.
I am thinking that in a few months time (or maybe a year) I'll start a small group and put chunks of it on line for enlightened criticism from a coterie of interested readers. You are among those who I would be glad to invite. Interested?
Yes, Hugh. That's good of you. So OK.

It will, though, be a year, or perhaps more, into the future.

Although retired and wanting to write more about atheism and to continue researching deeply into archaeology, I have just today been given a huge contract in science to start and complete first.
I am one grateful person to have found this site.

Thanks everyone
I am so proud of our Satellite Pay Channel MNET here in 3rd World South Africa for airing the entire series of The Genius Of Charles Darwin from BBC Knowlege, right through last week with repeats all day! Wow what a pleasant experience to watch Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennet and Richard Attenborough among others mentioning the dreaded word Atheist a number of times and the theory of evolution as opposed the fiction of god and tales of the bible. I felt so proud to be an Atheist as Dawkins mentions passionately in one of the episodes.

If you want a treat try and purchase the series. It is available here: http://store.richarddawkins.net/products/the-genius-of-charles-darw...
That's really good news, Lauren.

We would like to know how many of these excellent films from British main television have been widely broadcast in the United States and elsewhere.
I don't know much about pride, honestly. I was never proud to be anything, even when I was religious. I just like atheism becuase it works and explains most of the questions I have regarding the universe in the most succinct manner possible. (that is, they are invalid questions)
Ah, on the other hand, I always feel a surge of rising pride in the correctness of the atheist world view when having to argue with the pathetic fallacious claims of theists whose brains have been invaded and short-circuited by superstitious nonsense.
Perhaps I should add that despite my strong approach to the ideals of atheism, I can put up with some people being religious as long as they keep quiet about it, do not follow a subversive agenda of proselytising and preying on or interfering with others (which includes their own children), run all schools as secular establishments that teach nothing but the truths about humanity, science and the world, and adhere totally to all the equality principles that have to do with basic human rights.

By these entirely reasonable and fair standards, all the 'book' religions fail at once--- and miserably so.
I agree with Jeff's and D. E. Hall's point very much. We should be proud of our atheism and proud to have thrown off the fallacy of religion. And I am not only proud of, but often awed by, the sheer tenacity of scientifc thought to withstand the blunt, brutal hammer of religious doctrine.
However, it may be because I have only been an atheist for the past four years, but I do not think that such strict divisions between "us" and "them" are helpful. Remember that the vast majority of atheists in the world today are first generation non-believers; most of us were once theists ourselves. So I don't think theists are as pitiful and impervious to knowledge as they may seem ; )
As usual Don, that's a nicely written piece you have just prepared.

But I disagree with Mencken that every godbot has such "certain" "inalienable rights" regarding "superstitious" "imbecilities" that he can "teach them to his children". Somehow (I scarcely know how) parents should be discouraged from this, and certainly once school has begun, teachers should impregnate the system with atheistic principles at every opportunity.

The ripple of 'new atheism' that is sweeping limited sections of society needs to grow into a vast wave in order that theists are made to look the silly fools that they are---and become the new minority.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service