Reply #13: Re-li-gion [View All]

[varkam]

noun

1.a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
1.b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

(taken from The Free Dictionary)

Where would atheism fit in here? Not 1a, because there is no sort of supernatural power associated with it. Not 2b because there is no worship either. Definition 2 is circular. Not 3, because there is no leader. The only possible definition atheism could fall under would be 4 except that atheism really is not a cause, a principle, or an activity. It's simple disbelief. Moreover, that definition implies that there is some sort of end-goal associated with religion (as denoted by the word "pursued"). If there is an end-goal associated with atheism (other than world-domination, of course) I am blissfully ignorant of it. I'd be happy to debate you on that point, however.

What tends to stop me from saying that I am inclined to view elephants as toads and bicycles as rocks is because I have a firm grasp on what those words mean. Religion is a bit more of an ambiguous concept, so I suppose that it's only natural that there be some confusion. When religion is re-defined to include atheism (or science, or anything else) it is usually done by someone who has a motivation to do so in order for it to have a pejorative effect.

Is it too much to ask that we all use the language that we have agreed upon?