Can atheism EXIST without religion?

Answer 1

Honestly no it can not.

If there is no religion people wouldn't run around declairing there is no God or even giving the idea of a God a second thought. Do animals believe in a God? Are animals Atheists?
No and No. Animals flat out do not care either way.

If humanity would reach a point where people wouldn't need to hold on to the idea of a God or Gods then all forms of thought as to a God pro or against would stop!

It may sound nuts but the death of religion would mean the death of Atheism!

Answer 2

Can you not believe in Floybin (a word I just made up) without knowing what Floybin is?

Atheism is a default position unless there is a counter to it. You don't believe in Floybin any more than anyone else, because Floybin is simply a nonsense word.

Atheism is the default for everyone regarding most of the extinct religions, particularly the ones that left no literature or culture. We are all willing to avoid trying to recreate something that died a natural death.

Atheism is only necessary to be VERBALIZED when there are those who assert that there is a particular God or Gods or other mythology. We simply hold the same stance you probably hold toward Buffy, the Vampire Slayer. It's a story, not to be taken seriously. Unless someone else believes it and starts driving stakes into people's hearts.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 3

Nope. you're incorrectly inverting modus ponens. It boils right down to straight forward propositional good judgment. in case you commence with the proposition if P then Q and also you're saying that P is authentic then it follows logically that Q is authentic. that's written like this: if P then Q P for this reason Q An get collectively may be P="I surely have the flu" and Q="I surely have a sore throat" giving us "If I surely have the flu then I surely have a sore throat." - a real actuality, allow's assume for the needs of this argument. this may continuously produce authentic consequences see you later because the propositions P and Q are valid and the causal link is valid. that's commonplace as modus ponens. you are able to carry out some straight forward (and not in any respect so straight forward) alterations on it, and see you later as you try this wisely the best result will also be authentic. for example, that's obtainable to attain at right here: if P then Q not(Q) for this reason not(P) that's modus tollens. "If I surely have the flu then I surely have a sore throat." "i do not have a sore throat" "hence i do not have the flu." back, a real actuality. What you at the instantaneous are not allowed to do, yet you probably did besides, is attempt this: if P then Q Q for this reason P it really is a logical fallacy commonplace as holding the resultant and there is not any thanks to inform if that's authentic or not. If I surely have the flu then I surely have a sore throat I surely have a sore throat hence I surely have the flu this isn't unavoidably authentic - there are different causes you've gotten a sore throat. that's maximum regularly used (incorrectly) in arguments that flow as follows: John: All republicans are adversarial to gun administration Joe: that is not authentic. My uncle's adversarial to gun administration and he's not a republican. Joe looks to imagine he's drawing a end right here yet he's not, because John did not make a actuality about non-republicans. Joe's actuality is incomprehensible interior the context of this argument. and that is what you probably did. You affirmed the resultant, so what you reported has 0 value and factors 0 information to the communication. you won't be able to finish that god exists out of your premise. i wish you received't proceed to make an same mistake. that's an exceptionally complication-free one right here between theists.

Answer 4

The answer is no. Atheism is the belief that religion is wrong. WIthout religion, atheism would have nothing to prove wrong.

Answer 5

Religion is belief and practice, not merely idea. If the idea of god(s) can exist without belief, then only Atheism would exist.

Answer 6

My beliefs exist without following any religion, so I would say yes.

Answer 7

Absolutely. Atheism is the absence of a belief in God. It doesn't require religion to exist.

Answer 8

Man is a god (albeit false god) Gen.3:5-6. Atheism is a god outside of man(kind). Is believing in self a 'religion'?

Answer 9

Yes and no. If no religion and no gods, then non belief is rather an unneeded topic of discussion. Although the title would not exist.

Answer 10

It would be a natural state, though we might not be conscious of it. Atheism about gods is only relevant in a god-believing context. One might say we are all (god-believers and otherwise) atheists about Gurrangors. You don't know what I'm talking about because I just made it up. If there was no concept of god, atheism would be of this nature about him/it too.