Someone asked the opposite question so I thought I'd make sure it went both ways.
2006-10-12 16:27:29 · 30 answers · asked by Dysthymia 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
This is the inversion of Freud's thesis on religion. Paul Vitz, a psychology professor at NYU, makes the argument you just did. You might be interested in his work.
2006-10-12 16:29:57 · answer #1 · answered by BABY 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe somewhat, but I think it is mainly because people began to question the world and how it works. Actually Atheism and secularism became popular after Darwin and other science discoveries. The idea of a purely natural, scientic world with no supernatural control seemed more realistic since someone cannot "see" God. If you think about it before, a great amount of populations believed in God until man made many scientic progresses. Personally I don't think science can disprove God at all, if not it only emphasizes the presence of a God.
But I'm sure there are many interconnecting reasons why someone does not believe in God, maybe out of frustration and unwillingness to be controlled by a higher power.
2006-10-12 23:34:50 · answer #2 · answered by Jewelz S 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope. Atheism is the natural human condition. Every baby born in this world is an atheist (does not believe in gods). Religion must be taught. Religion must be created.
Why do some people become religious? They are taught by their parents and they believe them or they find too many questions impossible to answer so they turn to a belief system that gives them those answers.
Why do some lose their religion again and become atheists? Mainly because they find that they just can't fool themselves anymore and have to accept the unknown. They usually also come to the realization that religions are full of inconsistencies and generally pretty hateful to boot. I know I did.
2006-10-12 23:33:42 · answer #3 · answered by Skippy 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Possible, yes. Factual, no.
Atheism is the natural result of seeing God's influence steadily diminishing as science is better able to explain things. Thunder was God's direct involvement -- until we learned what Thunder was. Gravity was God's direct involvement -- until we learned some of what Gravity is (we're still working on that one, strangely enough...). The central placement of the Earth was God's direct involvement -- until we learned what celestial mechanics is.
Every time we learned something new in science, God was one more step removed from the universe. Since science is by design self-correcting and self-expanding, the logical conclusion is that by the time humanity reaches the omega point, there will be no more room left for God.
Therefore, there is no reason to believe in God... any version of a god.
2006-10-12 23:39:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That doesn't even make sense. If an atheist suspected that a god existed, his curiosity would impel him to investigate. If he confirmed the existence of a god, he'd stop being an atheist. It is even possible that he'd become a supporter (worshipper) of that god.
It is religious belief which is based on fear, not atheism. It is religious belief that insists on presumptuous faith in the absence of reason.
Religious belief is like not daring to question the existence of a monster in the closet, lest that monster come out and eat you for your impertinence.
Atheism is like opening every closet that can be opened, noticing that there are no monsters in any of them, and drawing no conclusions about closets that are in other houses or which cannot be opened for some other reason.
2006-10-12 23:35:34 · answer #5 · answered by David S 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I suppose anythings possible, but that explanation doesn't make complete sense.
If someone had a fear of eternal consequences, then they have a belief in hell. If they had a fear of going to hell, why would they therefore "insure their fate" of going there by denying God?
It would seem like that would be a fake belief just to avoid punishment, but in that, case deep down you would still really believe in hell so it would be silly to fake believe you didnt.
Oh, and then since you really believed in hell there would be no absense of belief so you wouldnt really be an atheist - just a poser atheist.
So unless you think Atheist don't really exist, thats probably not the reason.
2006-10-12 23:42:16 · answer #6 · answered by bumbleleigh 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think this question works. Atheism is the ABSENCE of a belief. It's like.... nothingness. I don't think you can "create" an absence. After all, don't we all start off as atheists until we are old enough to reason and decide for ourselves whether to believe in a God or not?
2006-10-12 23:32:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Atheism was simply the result of the age of reason applying the principles of logic and scientific method to religion. Which is neither reasonable, logical or has any empirical evidence to support it.
Has absolutely nothing to do with fear of god or any expectation of consequences. The consequences, regardless of what we do, is that the lights go out and our organic remains become worm food.
2006-10-12 23:32:39 · answer #8 · answered by Dane 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Actually, atheism is the state of simply not believing in god(s), not believing there is no god. Why would we fear something that doesn't exist for us? Ours is the pure state. The god stuff is made up out of fear. Period.
2006-10-12 23:34:48 · answer #9 · answered by Skeff 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The bible states that the opposite is true.
Athiests are created from the loss of the fear of Gods wrath.
Once they reject God in their heart, God allows this, and "gives them over to their own thoughts and desires.
More can be found on this very topic in the first three chapters of the book of Romans.
2006-10-12 23:32:12 · answer #10 · answered by cindy 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋