What can I look forward to in an atheist world?

Question

Can I expect to not be judged?

Can you positively guarantee beyond a shadow of a doubt that there will be no war?

If I question someones morals or beliefs will I be considered an outsider? Will I have cause?

Since there will be no such thing as a Bible in such a world, man will have to go be the laws set by man. How would people know that a law isn't bias, has loop holes, or limits the rights of someone else? Would we have laws to correct past laws (one after another).

Will there be no suffering in the world?

If someone doesn't have the desire or capability to be a product member in such a world, what will become of them?

If I have dissent towards the atheist society that I will be living in, will my concerns be addressed fairly?

Would I have a reason for my dissent in an atheist society?

Will one atheist nation always get along with another atheist nation?

If not how would they work out their disagreements?

Would it be necessary to have a military? Why or why not?

Have you asked a Filipino who is a seniror citizen what they think of the Japanese?

Correction: senior

The Bible doesn't change (yes it should a little) but it doesn't change. I am just wondering if we will have laws on top of laws on top of laws.

J M: Thumbs up for your honesty.

"You can dissent now mostly because of the actions of free-thinkers. Presumably in a world dominated by them, you'll have even more freedom of that sort. Of course, you also might be ignored, which fact seems to trouble you even now."

Raphael:
Thumbs up and very well said.

Crimson: No, I don't think I am judging atheists. I am asking them a question. Since they think that the world would be better without religion, I want to know how is that so?

ADDITION:

How can you guarantee that such a world or society not be like Cuba, the former USSR, and other atheist nations that have trouble?

Bajingo:
If my question is a strawman question, then the atheist who claims that things were be perfect is making a strawman argument. The atheist who claims that the world would be so great if there were no religion or people who believed in God or Allah, is making a strawman argument.

If you think, I am guilty of basing my question on a strawman fallacy, then right you are. It just seems that some atheists, in their mind, are making their strawman come alive. So I am basing my question of what they think could be a reality.

Correction:
"were be"
would be

I don't have to give any source. Why should I? Would I have to give a source to prove the common fact that celebrities think that they are better than the common folks? No. A celebrity won't say it, but anyone can see that for the most part it is true.

You want sources look at the postings of other atheists like yourself. The smug better than you attitude is prevelant. Just the same the holier than thou attitude is prevalent among theists on Yahoo.

Edit:

Saying that there would be war, but not because of righteousness is ridiculous. Why else would someone go to war unless they were absolutely sure that they were right, or righteous. You can be an atheist and feel that you are righteous.

I'd be a fool if I didn't put this question to vote. Everyone please pick wisely and fairly.

Thanks for answering my question, everyone.

Answer 1

Why would you think we promote any of those things?

You seriously have no understanding of atheism. All it means is lack of belief in a deity.

Answer 2

Can I expect to not be judged?

Answer: EVERYONE judges others. I don't care what religion you are, you have done it at some point. In fact, in this post you are judging atheists. Are you not?

Can you positively guarantee beyond a shadow of a doubt that there will be no war?

Answer: Nope. There will always be war as well. I can assure you though...there won't be anyone being killed in the name of God.

If I question someones morals or beliefs will I be considered an outsider? Will I have cause?

Answer: Funny... It seems to me that most atheists and pagan don't give a flying crap what religion you are or what your beliefs are. Generally, its the OTHER side of the spectrum that tries to shove religion down throats.

Since there will be no such thing as a Bible in such a world, man will have to go be the laws set by man. How would people know that a law isn't bias, has loop holes, or limits the rights of someone else? Would we have laws to correct past laws (one after another).

Answer: Right.... Because we ALL know the Bible was written by God...oh... wait... No it wasn't. The Bible was written by MEN. And in the Bible they discriminated against Homosexuals, Witchs, Women and, I'm sure, several other groups.

Will there be no suffering in the world?

Answer: There will ALWAYS be suffering in the world.

If someone doesn't have the desire or capability to be a product member in such a world, what will become of them?

Answer: The same thing that becomes of them right now. Duh.

If I have dissent towards the atheist society that I will be living in, will my concerns be addressed fairly?

Answer: I suppose that depends on how well you back your case.

Would I have a reason for my dissent in an atheist society?

Answer: Again, that would be up to you.

Answer 3

Can I expect to not be judged? No. People always judge, but at least you will be judged using reason rather then an arbitrary reading of an ancient book.

Can you positively guarantee beyond a shadow of a doubt that there will be no war? No. Its human nature to fight over things like property, space, resources, etc. But you will no longer have to face the "They don't believe in our God, so our God says they must die, so we must kill them without mercy" side of things.

If I question someones morals or beliefs will I be considered an outsider? Will I have cause? No you won't be considered an outsider, just a person like any other person. Not an unbeliever, nor a heretic, nor a heathen. Just a logical, reasonable rational skeptic.

Since there will be no such thing as a Bible in such a world, man will have to go be the laws set by man. How would people know that a law isn't bias, has loop holes, or limits the rights of someone else? Would we have laws to correct past laws (one after another). Of course. This is what is known as the Justice system in most coutries. America has the supreme court to amend laws, for example, and British law runs on the most recent precedent, with new precedents created constantly.

Will there be no suffering in the world? Hell no. Human nature: Regardless of religion, we get jealous, we get angry, we get sad. And those are just the things that aren't necessarily anyones fault. And we have yet to figure out a way to stop natural disasters, but then agagin neither has religion. Unless God comes and stops them all. Free will is an awkward thing, and exists in both religious and atheist creeds.

If someone doesn't have the desire or capability to be a product member in such a world, what will become of them? They can not be a product member. They just should be able to deal with how others will treat them because of it. We have the right to do as we please and the duty to take the consequences.

If I have dissent towards the atheist society that I will be living in, will my concerns be addressed fairly? Possibly. Democracy can more accuratly be called mob rule, but in general there seem to be enough ways for people to be heard and their concerns addressed, and thats without an atheist world.

Would I have a reason for my dissent in an atheist society? Probably. Taxes too high, not enough money for education, immigration, low availability of luxury goods, philosophical and moral differences, the list goes on. But its not so bad that it can't be reasoned around.


Basically, the problems of humanity would remain the same, but with one less cause for friction, war, prejudice and hatred.

Answer 4

"Can you positively guarantee beyond a shadow of a doubt that there will be no war?"

No, people can still find reasons to go to war over geopolitics and resources. I hope humanity will overcome this with time but I don't know. We wouldn't be able to do it in the name of God or claim religious reasons though. It would have to be done more honestly and hopefully the population would demand reasons rather than God told us to or is on our side against the evil ones.

"If I question someones morals or beliefs will I be considered an outsider? Will I have cause?"

I think moral debate is positive overall. There are things as a society we should question and consider. Is cloning where we want to go? Are there weapons we shouldn't use or methods of torture on prisoners? Etc... I just don't think one group should be able to shut the debate down for everyone by claiming authority of their ancient holy texts. I think the pros and cons should be discussed based on outcomes and consequences. I also think morality as an individual concern if it is not harming another should be an individual not a legislated matter. Also, one person has the right to live their beliefs but not obstruct another's right to live their beliefs if they aren't obstructing yours, ex. personal choice to use birth control or take EC if raped, etc...

"Since there will be no such thing as a Bible in such a world, man will have to go be the laws set by man. How would people know that a law isn't bias, has loop holes, or limits the rights of someone else? Would we have laws to correct past laws (one after another)."
We already have these problems haven't you noticed???

"Will there be no suffering in the world?"
Suffering exists in large quanties with religion. No one is saying everyone must become atheist anyway. As an atheist I am deeply concerned with doing more to alleviate suffering in this life since I think its up to us to do it. We just have each other and no super deity is coming to the rescue. I think humanity has made strides in alleviating disease and poverty over the last century and hopefully will continue to do so. Some suffering will always exist though, religion or not.

"If someone doesn't have the desire or capability to be a productive member in such a world, what will become of them?"
As an atheist I have volunteered weekly at shelters and other charity concerns. There are atheist charities. Far more secular countries have much better track records and stats on taking care of their disinfranchised members than the more theist U.S.. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have given many billions to charities to help those who need it, educate, prevent and cure disease, and alleviate poverty. I admire the work theistic groups have done and I don't deny they have done a lot and made great contributions but I don't think humans will stop wanting to make the world better if we are less religious in our beliefs. I think it is human to want to create a better world for ourselves and children.

Again I think this is a false dichotomy. I don't see a completely atheist world. I see a pluralistic world. I don't think society will fall apart or get worse than it is if people become less theistic.

Answer 5

Why do you expect these things from an Atheist world when all God's Love and Christ's Love in this world have not made these things so? You are in an Atheist world already, since there is no difference brought by religion except for a lot of hate and fighting based on religious belief. Why have theists not even been able to take their hands from around each others necks long enough to make peace already? We have hundreds of religions preaching love and peace, so why were the 9/11 bombers and Timothy McVeigh theists? Why are Israel and Palestine, two countries with strong religious ties, at war? Why has religion not united all the people and all the countries of the world - except for the Atheists. Go ahead and change the world, we are not stopping you.

God is on your side, right? So anything is possible, right?

Answer 6

"Since there will be no such thing as a Bible in such a world, man will have to go be the laws set by man. How would people know that a law isn't bias, has loop holes, or limits the rights of someone else? Would we have laws to correct past laws (one after another)."

Human beings DO go by human-made laws, not Biblical ones. The United States, for instance, is not a theocracy and does not use the Bible as a basis for what is legal or not.

As to the rest of your post, the term "atheist society" doesn't mean anything. It could be capitalist, socialist, anarchist, fascist, democratic, a republic, or any mixture thereof, so it's hard to answer most of your questions.

Answer 7

Atheism isn't a philosophy or political movement.

This question is a large, teetering strawman.

Politics is politics. Morals are morals. Religion is religion. Common law is currently derived from Anglo Saxon (secular/pagan) laws.

Atheism is simply lack of belief in deities.

"How can you guarantee that such a world or society not be like Cuba, the former USSR, and other atheist nations that have trouble?"

Those are communist/statist 'nations' not 'atheist' nations.

Again, your argument is a strawman.

UPDATE:

You say:

"then the atheist who claims that things were be perfect is making a strawman argument"

You need to give a source to the claimant's statement who said "things were be perfect".

That isn't a 'strawman argument' though, that is wishful, utopian thinking.

Atheism is certainly not characterized by such a thing. It is characterized by not beliving in deities.

Answer 8

nothing is certain, but at least you wouldn't be living a lie.

EDIT:
"Since there will be no such thing as a Bible in such a world, man will have to go be the laws set by man. How would people know that a law isn't bias, has loop holes, or limits the rights of someone else?"

the bible would not be burned by any means, it is still a valuable piece of ancient literature. as for the laws, just look to the constitution of the united states. technically the bible itself was constructed by man, we obviously understand the need for particular forms of social morality.

EDIT part 2:

"Would I have a reason for my dissent in an atheist society?"

atheism does not necessarily cure society of governmental dogma, but it does allow us to distinguish and rectify it. dissent, when properly directed is a good thing.

EDIT part 3:

"Will one atheist nation always get along with another atheist nation?"

eliminating the borders should be the next step. patriotism and nationalism only insight bigotry. of course there will be difference of opinion, but if we can think of ourselves in a collectivity of the human race instead of secs like american or british or swedish, maybe we will have a better sense of collectivism and try harder for peace. its harder to war with a brother.

hopefully you feel i addressed the main issues well enough without mumbling on, they're all good questions, and an atheist society would by no means be free of troubles, but it does seem to be the obvious way forward for society. a first step if you will.

Answer 9

Yes, you will be judged clueless, in an atheist world or any other.

Tolstoy said so long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be wars. And he was a Christian mystic.

If you judge other people's morals as if you are God's prosecutor, you'll get treated as an outsider in most possible worlds.

You live in a world of Man's laws now, but some men claim they got their laws from some god or another.

Corporeal beings are destined to suffer, in any corporeal world.

Unproductive people will need to find somebody productive to live off of, much as they do now.

You can dissent now mostly because of the actions of free-thinkers. Presumably in a world dominated by them, you'll have even more freedom of that sort. Of course, you also might be ignored, which fact seems to trouble you even now.

Answer 10

War and suffering can't be prevented. Humans are too ignorant to perfectly comprehend the imbalance of need and desire. But at least they will be honest wars, about real things, not imaginary principles and personalities, and likely shorter, because the practical costs will not be overwhelmed by stubborn "righteousness".

One thing that hopefully will be diminished is a sense of hierarchy and spiritual "authority". Ideas and practices would be judged on their practicality rather than personal bias. Leadership would be judged similarly, by results, not relationships or money.

The legitimacy of a law would be determined by its effects. The good of the community would be an important consideration, but a community is made up of individuals. A miserable efficiency is not much better than heedless corruption. And humans being individuals, some accommodation for irreconcilable differences would be necessary. At the extreme, people may need to resort to an equitable physical separation if peaceful coexistence is not acceptable.

There is a natural concern that an "atheistic" system would be so relentlessly practical that each person's worth would be the balance of their productive contributions against their personal cost to the society, but such a system would lead to an inhumane competition and fear of dropping too low on the scale, and clearly some contributions can't be effectively quantified. Most likely a basic slate of human rights would apply to every individual, with higher obligations expected of more capable individuals. Those who deliberately choose not to participate may need to negotiate their privileges on a proportional basis. (i.e. - One can't expect to have every advantage of citizenship if one refuses any obligation to support such advantages.)

No human system can be perfect, but an atheistic system would at least be human, with human accountability. And the very fact that you feel you would be a "dissenter" indicates that it would NOT be purely atheistic.

Answer 11

You're approaching atheism from a religious point of view, with all the baggage that carries. What you seem to be asking is 'if I drop my dogma, can you replace it with something equally reassuring and dogmatic'.
The answer would be no, if you ask someone to create a utopia for you, they'll enslave you, just look at history, the Communists tried to set up a socialist utopia and enslaved their people, the Taliban set up a Islamic state and enslaved their people and life under the Christian monarchies of Europe wasn't a barrel of laughs if you were the wrong denomination of Christianity.
So atheism won't guaranty any rights or give any guidelines, except a choice not to believe in superstitions. How you behave after that is up to you.