The Instigator
Alchestbreach
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
witherpig
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

atheism is not a religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Alchestbreach
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/13/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 725 times Debate No: 54643
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (1)

 

Alchestbreach

Pro

I think atheism by definition is not a religion.
witherpig

Con

i belive it is
Debate Round No. 1
Alchestbreach

Pro

O.K. Why do you believe it is a religion?
witherpig

Con

a religion is a common belief, mainly about the world and how to reach peace. It does not need a god.
Debate Round No. 2
Alchestbreach

Pro

atheist definition - someone who has a lack of a belief in the existence of God or Gods.

Religion definition - the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

Your definition of religion is wrong.
witherpig

Con

a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
-according to this definition it is most commonly god but not always

http://dictionary.reference.com...
Debate Round No. 3
Alchestbreach

Pro

I think this is the first time in a debate to where I was proven wrong, but still PHILOSOPHICALLY it is not a religion.
witherpig

Con

I agree that it is not a normal religion but it still is. It is not believing in a mythical force but science to explain our world . There are also some other non-theistic religions.
Debate Round No. 4
Alchestbreach

Pro

Alchestbreach forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by dawndawndawndawn 2 years ago
dawndawndawndawn
Atheism is not a religion just as "off" is not a TV channel
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
The first signs of religious belief were discovered in Africa, from around 70,000 years ago.
These were Animistic beliefs, which had no God only animal spirits, thus atheistic.
They had spirits without God.
Definite belief in a Deity didn't appear to around 20,000 years ago, and Atheism has always existed, but they never found any evidence for Atheism, only when they find no evidence for religion, then atheism is automatically assumed.

Just as my Psychic ex-gf believes in spiritual beings without any God, and she is also an Atheist.
She even refers to herself as an Atheist.
Yet she believes she talks to dead people.
I can do cold readings as good as she can, and I learned that from Ray Hyman's course on Critical Thinking.
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
Okay Wylted: Give me the Anthropologist, Historian definition of a Religion and compare that to no belief in Spiderman.

Then A-Spidemanism will be a Religion.

Because, technically, it is so very similar.
Atheism exists without any religious beliefs and in people who have no idea of what a God is.
Thus if I gave the Bible translated into their native language, to a New Guinea native who follow an Animistic belief system, without any God, and they would view the Bible in much the same way as we view a novel written about Gandalf, in The Hobbit.
Thus they would often see the Bible God as a fictitious story character like Gandalf and thus it would be the same as an Anti-Gandalfian.
Thus they are Atheists.
They would think of the Bible God as we think of Gandalf, a fictional character.
It is indeed the same.

I've studied much Anthropology and Ancient History.
Including the History of Religious belief.
I know very well that Atheism, which has existed as long as religion is nothing like a Religious belief.
Anthropologists can spot religious beliefs by patterns of behavior.
Such as burial of the dead with implements for the afterlife.
Villages and large buildings of worship, arranged in a particular fashion, such as facing North.
Implements and artifacts with significant, representative figures which are consistent within the village, culture.
There are no such artifacts nor significant practices for Atheism.
Thus Anthropologists don't find any evidence for no-religion, or Atheism.

So, that definition is?
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Not the same thing Sagey. You're looking at the layman's definitions if the terms atheist and religion. Anthropologists, Archeologists, historians etc. give deffierent definitions to these terms than the layman.
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
Is believing there is No Spiderman a religion? Well???
That's the size of their Belief and Doctrines.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
It is a religion. Friend request me and I'll send a PM explaining. I don't want to give your opponent an argument he wasn't planning on using.
Posted by Alchestbreach 2 years ago
Alchestbreach
@nonprophet I know, but some people still think it is, I hope to change their minds.
Posted by thesupporter 2 years ago
thesupporter
Spammer
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
If that's what the definition is, then there's nothing to debate about.
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
If that's what the definition is, then there's nothing to debate about.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
AlchestbreachwitherpigTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I read the definition Con sourced and it did not show that Atheism is a religion, Pro's argument was correct, because Con's argument/source did not prove Pro wrong. Pro evidently did not read it properly and rationally. Thus incorrectly conceded defeat. There are no "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe," in Atheism, no Set Of Beliefs exist, my ex gf is an Atheist, yet she believes in the afterlife and is a psychic. Pro did not understand the true scope of his statement, a disbelief is not a Belief.