To the atheists, please no Christian assumption answers, I am looking for honest truths about atheism?

Question

Do you believe that atheism is the next evolutionary step from faith? I have seen it written in this forum a few times and want to know if this is common thought?
Also, do you believe that this evolutionary step creates superiority over those who have faith?
This really is an honest question because I am trying to understand.

Answer 1

No i Don't. That would be like saying vegetarianism is superior to eating meat. There are simply choices. To do or to do not. We choose not to believe in God. It is not a evolutionary step, someone can have no faith from any background, or even without knowledge of religion.

Answer 2

Of course atheism is the next logical step, in fact it is the ONLY logical step. Faith is the absence of logic. Faith require that you throw logic away and just accept the doctrine "because it is written". However, Atheism is simply the non belief in a god or in gods. The next step in conceiving of and understanding the world would be Science.

The second part of your question asks if this step creates superiority over those who use 'faith'. The answer is 'yes' but the superiority is only in the method of examining the world and finding the truth about it, not in the person. The scientific person is not "superior" as in "better than" the religious person, they are equal. All people are equal in worth. The scientific method of learning is what is superior.

Answer 3

Atheism may be "evolutionary" only in that it is able to survive as a way of thinking in the light of all the evidence available better than theistic thinking. However, I'm not certain that biological evolution provides the best metaphor for philosophical discussions.

Your continuum of superiority is not helpful. It depends on what your criteria are. If someone is looking for the best philosophical stance to meld well with scientific evidence, atheism has a lot going for it. Atheism is willing to leave a lot of questions unanswered, but it functions under the assumption that there are scientific answers that will be discovered over time.

For those who cannot emotionally handle ambiguity, however, atheism is flawed. A theistic approach serves as an anxiety reducer for those who find it easier to live if there is some intelligence in charge of the universe, however sparse and diminishing the evidence that supports this viewpoint.

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

Answer 4

~~~ Steve ,,,, What you need is a Primer on The History of Mythology and get an Overview of The Evolution of mankind's gods. From the Primitive Nature Religions to Star Religions to the current(2-3000 yrs) "popular belief" of Monotheism. It is only a Logical Assumption that if this pattern plays out then atheism/agnosticism is the End Result. I don't want to get "trapped" in your term of "superiority" as I would use the analogy of a High School Senior is not "superior" to a freshman or a 2nd grader. In the sense that they both are at their Respective Levels of Understanding,,, And to further the analogy,,, when we all graduate from any school we are only seperated by a few degrees of "Understanding" even though we all had access to the same amount of "knowledge". Note: There are also as many Forms of Atheism as man can imagine them to be and I'm sure there would be many examples that I would consider to be Inferior to some forms of christianity. A textbook example would be Nazism.

Answer 5

I wouldn't say I think it creates "superiority". I know some Christians who are vastly superior to some atheists, and I know some atheists who are vastly superior to some Christians.
As for it being an EVOLUTIONARY step, I don't think it has as much to do with evolution as it does simply with our ability to understand the world and they way the world works better than we used to. In ancient times, man invented the idea of gods because they didn't understand basic things like the weather, the seasons, the sun and moon and stars, birth, death, etc. Belief in gods was completely about those things, and had nothing to do with personal souls or heaven or salvation. It eventually started to become more personal, and man started to come up with the idea of personal souls or spirits, and other worlds beyond life. As time went on, science began to explain how things like weather and seasons worked, and religion needed to adapt to that. Religion ceased to be about "the gods" punishing us through storms and dead crops, and became about salvation and rewards after death. Religion has managed to adapt pretty well, and regularly adjusts it's beliefs as scientific discoveries proves certain aspects of it's beliefs wrong. (The Earth being the center of the Universe, with everything revolving around it, mental illness vs demon possession, etc.) In that way, religious beliefs have evolved, but I don't know if I would say it's towards atheism. To some, atheism eventually becomes the logical conclusion, but some will hold on to religious beliefs no matter what science proves.

Answer 6

I think that the human race can never reach it's full potential with religion anchoring it to the past so yes, i do believe that atheism may the next step. But then i believe that it is not necessarily ummmm...well.... necessary that people stop believing in god...... but i think people need to be more focused on the here & now instead of trying to secure their spot in heaven & ignoring the problems of the world. I agree with someone who said humanism is the next best step..... but dropping the superstition & the belief in gods would be helpful.

As for Atheists being superior..... I can't say... I mean, when christianity started growing in numbers they started getting a rather large superiority complex.... So i suppose it's possible that if Atheism booms to those numbers Atheists may get feel a bit superior to those who follow ancient religions..... But i don't think it will be as grand as christian superiority.

Answer 7

Humanism was the next step after faith in my personal evolution, but it is not for everyone, so I wouldn't call it a "next evolutionary step" for everyone. And no, I don't look at atheism as superior to faith in every way, though certainly in many ways. Atheism dares to face reality, warts and all, without the comforting and comfortable buffer of superstition and reliance upon an invisible friend.

Just one point of view. I have great respect for my neighbors of faith and strongly defend their right to pursue happiness in whatever way best suits their temperament and conscience--so long as they violate no laws and do not attempt to deny others the same right to worship or not worship as their consciences dictate, too.

Answer 8

I believe that anytime mankind grasps and embraces a new truth (such as the fact that the Earth is round, or that God does not exist), it is a big step forward. Rather than wallow in petty superstition, mankind needs to face reality as it really is. This is the only way that we'll ever truely be able to take forward steps to solve the worlds problems without all of the prejudice and bigotry that organized religions bring to the table. By their very nature, religions "divide" the world into separate camps.

Answer 9

No. Atheism is the opposite of theism and has nothing to do with faith. For example, what you are asking is analogous to asking whether Mammals will be the next evolutionary step for Insects. (well, kinda).

Answer 10

It seems to me that there are many who turn from Christianity to Buddhism. According to Wikipedia, there are two different types of atheists-I forgot the exact titles but one type does not believe in any spiritual world, or anything not explained by scientific reasoning and the other believes there is, but has not been defined accurately by any religion.
There's a book called 'The God Gene' that's supposed to be written by a biological scientist (something like that) that explains humans have a cluster of cells in their brain that contain that belief. Some people seem to have absolutely no concept of a more powerful, spiritual identity. Whether they're evolutionarily farther advanced or genetically mutated, not sure. I haven't read the book myself.