Well, an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms.
That’s just plain not true, unless you construct your definition of “religion” to exclude a pretty substantial chunk of world religion. I claim that such a definition doesn’t cut reality at the joints.
A Zen monastery, a Reconstructionist Jewish wedding, a Quaker* meeting.
*Not all Quakers, of course, some are overtly Christian, but it’s worth noting that the whole thing works just as well for just about any level of belief-in-god.
I mean “atheist” is just “without god” and all the things Ben mentioned are in fact without god as far as I know, and I can specifically confirm the case that western Zen practice is atheistic. But I’m guessing you’re trying to say something more like “aspiritual” or “without spirituality”.
“Spiritual but not religious” is a separate category from “Atheist”, to the government and to the people who identify as it. Glossing atheist as “without god” is a literal translation, not a true one.
For what it’s worth, I downvoted this reply because it comes across to me as inappropriately hostile. If it wasn’t meant that way, I can explain why if desired.
I was being aggressively argumentative, because it seems to me like you’re at least tacitly claiming that your view is canonical so the burden of proof is on me. But, interpretive labor claims are really hard to adjudicate, so most likely we’re each gonna have to do more than we think is fair if we’re gonna resolve this.
Are we talking about Atheist Religious Ceremonies or atheist religious ceremonies? The former does exist but the exemplars are few and not-great.
For the latter: weddings, birthdays, graduation ceremonies, funerals, certain kinds of concerts. I’m guessing this is the sort of thing Benquo was talking about although I’m not that confident.
Weddings and funerals are not religious? (You are right that bithdays and graduation ceremonies are not. “Certain kinds of” concerts had a lot of work being done by “certain kinds of”, but there are concerts that are absolutely religious. I assume you’ll call them “not atheist”.
You were the one that first brought up “an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms” and I’m not really sure what your goal with the sentence was.
Religious weddings and funerals are common because most people are religious. Most weddings and funerals of atheists I know of were not atheist, because the principals weren’t antitheist enough to care and their families wanted a religious ceremony. But, for example, Ozy and Topher Brennan’s wedding was not religious.
And I don’t know what kinds of concerts you’re referring to at all, but yes, I expect so. Religious and atheist are antonyms.
As a short argument: Good is to Evil as Atheist is to Religious. It’s as weird to say that an atheist ceremony is religious as to say that an evil person is good.
I don’t think this argument is especially worth continuing, but my short rebuttal is “no. The opposite of theism is anti-theism. Religion != Theism, and atheism is not even obligated to have a strong opinion on theism apart from “not true.”
That’s just plain not true, unless you construct your definition of “religion” to exclude a pretty substantial chunk of world religion. I claim that such a definition doesn’t cut reality at the joints.
I don’t believe you. Please provide three examples of atheist religious ceremonies.
A Zen monastery, a Reconstructionist Jewish wedding, a Quaker* meeting.
*Not all Quakers, of course, some are overtly Christian, but it’s worth noting that the whole thing works just as well for just about any level of belief-in-god.
I wouldn’t term those atheist.
I mean “atheist” is just “without god” and all the things Ben mentioned are in fact without god as far as I know, and I can specifically confirm the case that western Zen practice is atheistic. But I’m guessing you’re trying to say something more like “aspiritual” or “without spirituality”.
“Spiritual but not religious” is a separate category from “Atheist”, to the government and to the people who identify as it. Glossing atheist as “without god” is a literal translation, not a true one.
For what it’s worth, I downvoted this reply because it comes across to me as inappropriately hostile. If it wasn’t meant that way, I can explain why if desired.
That seems fair. It was a reply to a comment I perceived as hostile.
I was being aggressively argumentative, because it seems to me like you’re at least tacitly claiming that your view is canonical so the burden of proof is on me. But, interpretive labor claims are really hard to adjudicate, so most likely we’re each gonna have to do more than we think is fair if we’re gonna resolve this.
Are we talking about Atheist Religious Ceremonies or atheist religious ceremonies? The former does exist but the exemplars are few and not-great.
For the latter: weddings, birthdays, graduation ceremonies, funerals, certain kinds of concerts. I’m guessing this is the sort of thing Benquo was talking about although I’m not that confident.
I don’t consider those religious.
Weddings and funerals are not religious? (You are right that bithdays and graduation ceremonies are not. “Certain kinds of” concerts had a lot of work being done by “certain kinds of”, but there are concerts that are absolutely religious. I assume you’ll call them “not atheist”.
You were the one that first brought up “an atheist religious ceremony is a contradiction in terms” and I’m not really sure what your goal with the sentence was.
Religious weddings and funerals are common because most people are religious. Most weddings and funerals of atheists I know of were not atheist, because the principals weren’t antitheist enough to care and their families wanted a religious ceremony. But, for example, Ozy and Topher Brennan’s wedding was not religious.
And I don’t know what kinds of concerts you’re referring to at all, but yes, I expect so. Religious and atheist are antonyms.
This is an argument about definitions, and I’m not sure what the point is.
As a short argument: Good is to Evil as Atheist is to Religious. It’s as weird to say that an atheist ceremony is religious as to say that an evil person is good.
I don’t think this argument is especially worth continuing, but my short rebuttal is “no. The opposite of theism is anti-theism. Religion != Theism, and atheism is not even obligated to have a strong opinion on theism apart from “not true.”