Atheism=Theology

[Comrade Anarchist]

Just wondering what you all thought about what Max Stirner said about atheism. He pretty much says that it is nothing more than a form of theology. He says it praises man instead of a god. He argues that atheists are not abandoning the idea of gods but are instead replacing them by raising the idea of man to the level of a god. I think you can see this in some of ayn rands work ecspecially the stoddard temple from The Fountainhead. A stature is made that represents man as looking up towards the clouds only to see himself and show that man is god, and there are other examples of this throughout her work. So what do you think of what stirner said and can you find any other examples of it.

[tophat]

Yes, it "praises man instead of a god" - which is a thoroughly good thing.
No, it does not mean we atheists are "abandoning the idea of gods but are instead replacing them by raising the idea of man to the level of a god". We do not raise humans to the level of God - we accept humankinds place in the earth without worshipping humans. Instead, we get on with our lives. Theology is the study of God and religious belief. Atheists (politically radical ones anyway) say we shouldn't bother wasting our lives on something predicated largely on submission of the individual to a higher authority - so theology is to a great extent a waste of time.

[Ayn Rand is sick - what you are doing referencing here in a revleft forum I do not know. Please don't miappropriate anarchist language and imagery for your own capitalist ends.]

[mikelepore]

Praising "man instead of a god" is not a "form of theology." Words have prior meanings. Words can't be used to mean anything at all from one minute to the next.

[Nolan]

How about we praise nobody, capitalists included?

It's a radical idea, I know.

[Decolonize The Left]

mikelepore is absolute correct.

"Theology" is "the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world." Given that atheism is a blatant and straight-forward denial of the existance of a god and religious faith, the comparison is not accurate.

In fact, it can be seen as an attempt to undermine the logical analysis of atheism by focusing on one person's characterization of the 'way' in which atheism operates. What Stirner has done in his analogy is simply equate a human being's focus with 'religious faith.' This comparison is clearly not accurate and, to the credit of most honest theists, insults their faith.

As for other examples, a common theme in Nietzsche's work is the difference between a human's reliance upon god for meaning and another's reliance upon science, reason, etc... He also explores what might happen when neither suffice for worthy meaning, and the advent of nihilism.

- August

[CallMeSteve]

I think it was Clark Adams who said that "if atheism is a religion, then health is a disease."

I genuinely cannot see how theists find it so difficult to acknowledge that atheism and general rational thought is quite simply a renounciation of social memes and zeitgeists that people take for granted as true, and acknowledgement that all we as a species can 'know' is what we have evidence for.

There is not the slightest shred of evidence - or any sort of inclanation at all - to suggest that what theists say is true; it's effectively a nonsensical field of study that people have become convinced is a veritable subject because of the pervading, time-spanning nature of this 'faith' disease.

And another quote I love from the amazing Bertrand Russell:
"I wish to propose for the reader's favourable consideration a doctrine which may, I fear, appear wildly paradoxical and subversive. The doctrine in question is this: that it is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true."