deity-free religions?

[eShirl]

It's my understanding that Buddhism is either deity-free or doesn't require a belief in any dieties. What are some others?

I would think there might be animist religions in this category, but the only one I know of is Shintoism and there are deities in Shintoism.

[Richard D]

1. Well . . .

. . . Taoism for one. Some forms of Shamanism. Some have an idea of a God, but it's not the old man in the sky. Deism comes to mind.

[Taverner]

2. Taoist and Confucian Religions are mostly without Diety

Granted, many followers have added gods...

[SPedigrees]

3. Universalist/Unitarian nt

[HelenWheels]

5. Depends on the UUer

I belong to the UU church and many of our members believe in God. The best thing about the UU church is one can believe in God, not believe in God, believe in an inner spirit, believe in nature as a guiding force or any other number of beliefs. And the great thing about the UU church is all beliefs are accepted. UUers believe in peace, love and treating all as equals.

[bananas]

4. Scientism

"the belief that the methods of natural science, or the categories and things recognized in natural science, form the only proper elements in any philosophical or other inquiry"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

[Orrex]

27. No one follows "Scientism" as a religion

Many are accused of it, but that's simply an attempt to reduce an endlessly verified system of explanation to the same level as superstition.

The label "scientism" is simply an attack.

[bananas]

37. No one belongs to a cult, either.

Go ahead, ask a cult member, they'll tell you,
"No, no, this isn't a cult!"

Same thing for addicts, they'll tell you,
"No, no, I'm not an addict, I can quit any time I want, I just don't want to."

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt, it's also a lack of insight.

[Orrex]

39. Well, no theist is a benightedly superstitious primitive, either.

Just ask them.

[Deep13]

32. Made-up word.

Attempts to characterize science as a religion are designed to protect the credibility of religion by making it seem that science and religion are just different ways of understanding reality.

[Orrex]

40. Of course you'd say that

You're a cultist.

[Why Syzygy]

42. Of course 'science' is not a religion.

Some of its fans do worship it, but it is not religion in and of itself. The reason science is USED as a religion by some is accounted by the belief that there is no higher being than King Science. It is attributed with god like qualities. The claim is that science is infinite, it knows all, it offers a path to paradise if only all those superstitious nuts would get out of the way. It rules as Supreme All, in the minds of the devoted.

Science is basically a tool. Where would we be without discovery? It begins with mystery. What ifs.
Very creative.

I guess there's one thing God and Science have in common. They both promise to send rain to both the 'deserving' and the 'non-deserving'.

Just because we choose a different object of worship, the ramifications are the same.

[Deep13]

45. Well, I've need heard of anyone worshipping science...

...except for claims like this by religious people.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Atheism at DU?

I'm under the distinct that some believe that this guy can walk on water:

[DeSwiss]

8. You say that you're "under the distinct"?

- Bet that's gotta hurt....

[Buzz Clik]

10. Oh noes! Another typo?

:cry:

[TZ]

12. Yes because science is just another religion, right?

:sarcasm:
PRAISE DAWKINS! Some memes are just too dumb..:eyes:

[Buzz Clik]

15. Jumping to conclusions, are we? A bit sensitive of our hero, are we?

tsk tsk.

[Orrex]

41. Well, you did sort of accuse atheists of worshipping him as the Messiah, which is simply offensive.

I'll have you know that DU's atheists worship me as the Messiah. And rightly so.

[Goblinmonger]

13. Oh, you're killing me

:rofl: That's hilarious. Because, yeah, thinking someone is intelligent and respecting their ability to speak out about their lack of belief in a world that despises that lack of believe is EXACTLY like a belief in a diet. EXACTLY. Good one.

[Buzz Clik]

14. "...EXACTLY like a belief in a diet." I think your typo is worse than mine.

[Goblinmonger]

18. Clearly Freudian. Nice catch. n/t

[eShirl]

16. I take it from the replies this is a photo of Richard Dawkins?

SOrry, I'm not familiar with him or his works, other than knowing he's a famous athiest.

[Buzz Clik]

20. Yeah, it's Dawkins. A bit of a cult hero among the atheists here.

I like to give the Radical Atheist Congregation a nudge every now and them to remind them that atheists should be secure enough in their non-beliefs that they don't need a messiah and they should not be fazed when someone teases them about their stance.

[Deep13]

33. No. No one believes that.

Glad we could clear that up. Nevertheless, his evidence versus the mere guesses and a priori arguments of the faithful isn't really a fair fight.

[Buzz Clik]

46. Yeah, I agree. The following of St. Richard is more of a cult than an actual religion.

Riddle: How many books that hammer religious beliefs is enough?

(This is a rhetorical question. In the case of Dawkins, the answer is obvious)

[Deep13]

49. It's "enough" when the subject has been thoroughly explored.

I'm sure there are aspects of religion than none of the well-known critics have hit on yet.

[Buzz Clik]

50. Once you demonstrate to yourself that there is no god/God, you're done.

You don't have to "explore" the various ways that faith is pursued and editorialize.

If Dawkins and his disciples ... er, followers ... focused only on the negative implications of an overzealous religious congregation (i.e., ramming religious tenets down the throats of those who don't believe), then I'd shut the hell up. But he's one of those people who just cannot stop -- he takes the next step of telling believers that they are fools and calls agnostics cowards. He's as obnoxious as any fire-and-brimstone preacher or Church Lady.

[Deep13]

51. Are the evangelicals shutting the hell up?

That's with a small "e" BTW.

No one is suggesting that they stop writing and talking and indoctrinating children about the same old shit. Fortunately neither Dawkins nor any of the other critics of religion need your permission to keep talking and writing.

If you read the God Delusion, you know that his main premise is that irrationality is harmful to the world. Live and let live has never been possibleb because the religious zealots and the rank and file believers who support them will never leave nonbelievers alone. Consequently, why shouldn't he talk about it? And obnoxious or not, he's still right. You know, a lot of people find his point of view to be quite liberating.

No one questions the right of priests (whatever your particular religion calls them) to lie to people. Atheists have no special duty to shut up. The way you feel when Dawkins calls religion foolish is the way I feel every time I see some trite and irrational religious crap is presented to me either in writing or speech.

[Buzz Clik]

52. Being a lapsed agnostic with absolutely no religious affiliation, I have no pony in the race.

I'm simply pointing out that atheism should not be a religion unto itself; it should be the absence of religion. Granted, Dawkins can continue to write books about the insanity of all organized religions, and he can continue to call me a coward for not taking the sacrament of his non-belief. In the mean time, millions of atheists around the world quietly continue to believe in no god and are quite comfortable in not believing with no need for a messiah or a sacreligious text. We'll continue to resist injecting religion into our nations' laws, and we'll continue to try to strip existing overt religious context in the rule of law.

[Deep13]

53. Lapsed agnostic? So, you've made up your mind then.

Atheism is not a religion. Rejection of the idea of a god is not the affirmative belief in anything. It is not a religion and by definition cannot be a religion. The fact that some people have concluded and feel deeply that it is the right answer does not make it a religion anymore than the 18th century proponents of democracy made that a religion. So, I dispute the whole premise of your argument.

[Buzz Clik]

54. Once you organize, send kids to Camp for Nonbelievers, and start following a philosophical leader...

... it's a religion.

You're free to do so, but let's be honest about it.

[uberllama42]

55. I know people who feel the same way about Andy Warhol as some do about Dawkins

There are organized groups who discuss and admire Warhol's work. Do those things make Warholism a religion?

[Deep13]

57. That's not what religion is.

Religion includes belief in a supernatural god. Please don't project your preconceptions onto others. You may equate common point of view, purpose or community to religion, but not everyone does. Under your definition, the Democratic Party or a labor union is a religion. Just because you cannot imagine these things in a nonreligious context, don't assume we all have that limitation.

First, we don't really have a philosophical leader. Dawkins is simply the most outspoken of the bunch. We are free to disagree with him or anyone else. We are even allowed to laugh when South Park makes fun of him. Second, having a philosophical leader does not make something a religion. Frankly, since we are not allowed in many summer camps including anything that has to do with the Boy Scouts, Camp Quest and others like it make perfect sense. Anyway, you are dodging the point. It's not a religion and having events for our point of view does not make it one.


As a side note, even if you are right in your characterization, there's still no god.

[Buzz Clik]

58. I most certainly was not dodging the point -- you simply refuse to accept my argument.

It's all part of the debate.

I recall gays (openly gay, anyway) being excluded from the Boy Scouts (aka, Hitler Youth ;)) but I have no such recollection of atheists being excluded. Unless you wear your nonbelief on your sleeve, I'm not sure how the Scouts would know. Granted, the Boy Scouts' obsession with God is annoying, but it's annoying to a lot of Christians, too.

As a side note, even if you are right in your characterization, there's still no god.

Okay, but the presence or absence of a god is not paramount to my argument. Keep in mind that my suggestion that atheism at DU is a religion was in response to the question, "deity-free religions?"

[Deep13]

59. Awright, I wrote a thoughtful response and my fucking computer deleted it.

1. BSA does exclude atheists.

2. So seem to be taking it for granted that being dishonest about who we are and what we think is acceptable for atheists. What if an organization excluded Jews, but that's okay, if they did not wear those hats no one will know? We have no duty to shut up or to hide what we think. If you don't like the official Polish jokes, just don't tell them that you're Polish! Sorry, lying to oneself and others may be a normal part of Christianity since doubt is not allowed, but it is not a normal part of a healthy life.

3. If BSA's obsession with god annoys Christians, just what are they doing about it? And BSA isn't the only civic group like that, just the most obvious example.

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then... they came for me... And by that time there was no one left to speak up." (Martin Niemöller)

4. I don't accept your argument because it is factually and logically wrong. Religion = belief in god. No god means it is not a religion. Some forms of Buddhism are not religions because they do not pertain to deities.

[Buzz Clik]

60. What I know about the Boy Scouts, you can put in a thimble.

I don't like them, but lots of people are delighted that their son(s) is(are) part of the group. If they exclude atheists, all the more reason to flick them off as irrelevant. And although I compared the Boy Scouts to the Hitler Youth, I was kidding. I get the feeling you feel that they really are like Nazis. Meh.

Now, if you don't like my argument that some of the atheists here at DU act as if they are part of a religion, I'm okay with that. However, I didn't start this hypothetical thread that asked the question "deity-free religions?" So, if you are totally convinced that "Religion=belief in god", then you should have simply said that and moved on. I'm willing to accept your argument, but IF we buy into the hypothetical even for the sake of argument, then I strongly believe that some of the atheists here at DU act as if they are part of a religion with no deity.

[ZombieHorde]

62. Are political parties religions? nt

[Buzz Clik]

63. Your question is a bit vague.

Are ALL political parties religions? No.

Are SOME political parties based on religion? Yes.

Are SOME political parties similar to a religion without a deity? Absolutely.

Do some of the members of non-religious political parties behave as if they are religious zealots? Yep.

[uberllama42]

38. Just curious

Why did you post a picture of Dawkins instead of just saying "I'm under the distinct impression that some believe that Richard Dawkins can walk on water"?

Just wondering.

[Buzz Clik]

47. Because my comment was directed specifically toward those who would recognize his picture.

[uberllama42]

56. Gotcha. n/t

[varkam]

44. Can't the Holy Order of the Perpetually Offended come up with some original snark?

The whole "atheists think Dawkins is God!" schtick is kind of old.

[Buzz Clik]

48. Damnit! I can never please you people.

I'll keep trying.

[varkam]

61. Please do. eom

[rug]

7. If you remove deity from religion you're left with philosophy.

[ZombieHorde]

9. This is not true.

re⋅li⋅gion
   /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation Show IPA
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion

I would like to see how the U.S. government defines religion.

[rug]

19. What do you call a superhuman agency?

[ZombieHorde]

21. X-Men.

Definition 2 does not involve any superhuman agencies.

[moggie]

28. But definition 2 is a crock

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

I take "fundamental" to mean something like "basic, essential, primary". So, according to this definition, a group of people who agree that diet and exercise are essential for a good life are practising a religion. In fact, since "a number of persons" could apply to humanity as a whole, the belief that one needs to breathe to survive is a religion.

I'd suggest that the quantity and quality of evidence for a belief plays a part in whether the belief is religious. Is the sun a ball of hydrogen about 93 million miles away, or is it a guy with the head of a falcon riding in a sky chariot? Are these two beliefs equally religious in nature?

[ZombieHorde]

29. I see you snipped definition 2 to fit your point.

Besides, the first definition doesn't say there has to be a superhuman entity, it says there usually (esp.) is one.

Buddhism is godless and is considered a religion by vast majority of people which is why they enjoy a tax break here in the U.S.

[moggie]

30. I only snipped the EXAMPLES

The full definition 2 is:

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

Since the examples tacked onto the end are (obviously) not an exhaustive set of possible "beliefs and practices" which fit the definition, they don't exclude the possibility of other "beliefs and practices" being called religion by someone appealing to this definition: Marxism, veganism, NASCAR, shopping...

I agree that religion doesn't have to involve a superhuman agency, I just think the above definition is poor.

[Silent3]

22. Anything it wants to be called! :) n/t

[eShirl]

23. ba-doom boom

:rofl:

[Deep13]

34. No, religion is not philosophy.

Religion replaces philosophical inquiry with guesses about what god wants.

[rug]

36. Therefore, when you remove God you're left looking for philosophical guesses.

[Deep13]

43. okay, I see your point nt

[silverweb]

11. Scientific (aka naturalistic) pantheism.

:)

[eShirl]

17. pantheism still involves a deity though

as I understand it

[silverweb]

24. That's why I specified the narrower version.

Naturalistic or scientific pantheism holds that "the Universe, although unconscious and non-sentient as a whole, behaves as a single, interconnected, and solely natural substance." _more_.

Most definitions of "God" hold that the deity is conscious, sentient, omniscient, etc -- for theistic pantheists, deity is "other" even while omnipresent in nature.

Rather different.

[eShirl]

25. non-theist panthesim?

trying to wrap my brain around (and around) that...

[silverweb]

26. Purely semantics.

Calling it scientific panphilosophy or scientific panatheism just doesn't have the same ring to it at all.

The modifier, "scientific" or "naturalistic," added to the concept of pantheism almost makes the phrase an oxymoron. By doing so, it accurately conveys the point, which is reverence for the natural universe/all that exists, thus eliminating the need for an imaginary "supernatural" deity.

[Deep13]

35. The god of say Spinoza is so limited...

...that it is essentially nothing more than a personification of nature itself without intentionality, intelligence, ability to act or even to hear prayers, much less answer them. I have to ask in what way the pantheistic deity is god at all?

[Deep13]

31. In animism, the spirits are the deities.

For some reason going from animism to polytheism to monotheism is seen as progress by many historians. I really can't see any basis for that beyond Western ethnocentrism.

Anyway, ancestor worship is often a part of animism and much of Asia follows this belief. My understanding is that Buddhism can be theistic with belief in gods or it can exist without that. Since Buddhism began as a heresy of Hinduism, it should not surprise anyone that it often incorporates Hindu elements. I am also aware of examples of Buddism being added to the preexisting animistic religion.