Collective Identity of Non-theists
Proposition: Non-theists (atheists, agnostics, etc) that are active in the atheist community share a collective identity around more than their non-theism. This identity includes 1) an appreciation and support of science, 2) support for separation of church and state, 3) broad humanistic or egalitarian values, and 4) broad distaste for the perceived negative influences of religion. Evidence for this identity comes from trends in interviews, survey data, and media content analyses (books, blogs, videos, etc).
Question: Do you agree that there is a collective identity among Non-theists around more than the fact that we all do not believe in a deity? We often talk about that the only thing we have in common is that we don't believe in a god but the data points to that not being true.
Please remember we are talking about trends here, not everyone is going to fit the mold perfectly.
4
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
14 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Non-theism is kind of like "indie music" or "non-denominational Christianity". Nominally, these things are just sort of different in one way from other standard groups. But in actual practice there are often several other major similarities.
Some people are willing to call Atheism a worldview, others consider it a single statement of non-belief. I don't much care either way. Frankly, your four commonalities are more important than the position on theism anyway.
A world (or just a community) that simply focuses on points 1 and 3 (with 2 and 4 embedded in 3 on an as needed basis), would be a great start for a better world.
Rhetoric
Level 7
July 23, 2018
1
It’s more that the product of antitheism is a result of the common education and environment influences we have experienced to reach our conclusions, isn’t it? This isn’t some idea that occurs within a closed mindset community of influence. It’s not the easiest choice, so there’s also a emotional characteristic as well.
Clever2day
Level 3
July 13, 2018
0
I fall with all the parameters your set but "atheist" does not dictate those rubrics as Non-theists exist in a rather diverse spectrum of intellectual and rational strengths.
NoMagicCookie
Level 8
July 13, 2018
0
I disagree with the notion of being active about something that has never been a a part of my life & is seriously unimportant to me . I am here because no-one is going to be god bothering and I am certainly uninterested in delving into whys and wherefores and fighting over naming all the words for not having a god - so it isn't all smooth sailing - but folks on here are really pleasant on the whole - its a safe site and a kindly one I choose to come here as I feel I have got to know some people and I can have a laugh.
jacpod
Level 8
July 8, 2018
2
My apologies for not better explaining the term of "active" I wanted to keep the question as compact as possible - it simply means someone who engages in a community. For Non-theists this can span from reading books on atheistic matters to writing or reading blogs to going to local freethinker meet-ups to going to conferences to watching debates; in other words, engaging regularly with or consuming content of those of similar beliefs.
I see in your profile that you are from the UK and I should note that the communities around non-belief are much different in Europe than in the US/Canada, which the data this proposition is from draws on, due the lower levels of religiosity in the general population and the different types of religions (far, far fewer evangelic religious communities).
But for the use of 'trends' I would have voted on the second choice. I have to acknowledge the trends but without allowing them to qualify as making non-believers a 'community' in broad terms. Trends are birthplaces of doctrines and people craving control of others and their points of view for personal benefit and aggrandizement are the parents. Unfortunately, most of these self-appointed leaders and definers of who is more and less legitimate are almost always male.
Rejection of beliefs in doctrines established like so many bridles for us by these would-be teamsters isn't complete evidence of independence of thought. It's only mere rejection of gods and such. What is described as our 'community' would be more pleasant and stimulating if it was closer to a complete escape.
An improvement over agnostic/atheist in filtering out people deluded by theologians would come from adding to it rejection of politogians and their fabrications about future paradises right here on the planet. I've pointed out the similarities making political ideologies functionally identical with their superstitious cousins called religions before.
Bottom line, as in function and outcome, is politically addicted lickspittles are just as captive as are the most ignorant back-woods snake handlers with the added feature of actually worshipping the snakes. They bring their saints and devils into conversations as alleged free thinkers, so proud of themselves for having rejected only one social club because it is superstitious; while proselytizing for their favorite political party or constantly failing political ideology (talk about superstition).
Trying to reason based on individual thought with a far-Right, Fundamentalist Christian or a far-Left Democratic Socialist is like trying to discuss double rainbows with the congenitally blind. If it isn't part of their darkness it not only doesn't exist; but doesn't deserve existence.
Silver1wun
Level 7
July 8, 2018
1
I think this kind of broad definition does apply to a large group, indeed the largest group within the non believer community including globally. Indeed these characteristics should apply to non believers, in my humble. But we are all aware that the herding cats analogy does apply, with many exceptions, including reactionary conservative non believers who care little for humanistic or social and equity issues, secular religionists who seem to believe in religion in a thinly disguised secular form, new age types who consider themselves non religious but peddle pseudo religious-science mumbo jumbo, and so on. Despite this the existence of a major and global and I think growing group, of which I am one, with the characteristics you have attributed is important to recognize and hopefully build on.
David1955
Level 8
July 7, 2018
3
Cheers. I will say the data that this premise is drawn from is primarily about US and Canadian atheists - as there isn't as much research in other countries (and there is barely any here) - so it is a bit harder to apply on the global scale. As you say there are always going to be people who do not fit into the collective identity completely, however, from my analyses of the research this does seem to be where Non-theists in the US/Canada are in terms of a collective identity. Being aware of this, as you say, can allow us to build upon and strengthen that identity if we chose to (or as some in these comments chose to - reject it completely).
I suppose there is a community of non believers. From what I have seen in the last decade or so has shown me that along with becoming a non-theist has put most in the interest of math, evolutionary biologe, astro physics and such, and for that is something that I love to see.
But it was different for me. I have always been a non-believer, I was not brought up in a religious houshold. And in my time back when, I was lucky enough that all of the sciences were taught with no religious intent.
I learned a lot back then, and it got me into some great classes in colledge. I have been greatful that I was able to learn about evolutional biology, phisics, and advanced math.
It wasn't till a few decades later that I started to hear about Atheism, flat earthers, the world is only 6 thousand years old and many things like that.
I find it abismal that the education system is so frought with discrepency that simeple things are questioned by those that have no education, yet will post such nonsense, and even more, there are so many that will believe it just because they read it on the internet.
For fuck's sake, there are some people that believe, that we didn't go to the moon, or that the earth is flat.
WTF.
I don't honestly chalk it up to stupidity, I rather posture that most are very misinformed. I'm not sure that I know a solution to that, but I do what I can to provide some real Science to those that do not know any better.
TristanNuvo
Level 8
July 7, 2018
0
I don't pledge allegiance to science... not I am at war with god, religion or church. I don't do poll by strangers either. You are So Way Off little kid. I hope my answer will keep me off your group and collective.
GipsyOfNewSpain
Level 9
July 7, 2018
0
Well that was unnecessarily aggressive.
@Billiwip I agree, no idea what that could have been about!
@Geoffrey51 That's your "problem", you have no idea.
As I said these are trends in that are seen in the group - not everyone is going to fit inside the mold and there are always outliers of which you are apparently one. I will also say though your first two statements do not at all relate to what I said - support of science is not pledging allegiance to it and being against the negative influences of religion is not being at war with god/religion/church.
@Nicsnort You haven't been in this site long enough... hell, you haven't been an atheist long enough...
@GipsyOfNewSpain Darling I was on this site about two weeks after it launched. I just don't comment on anything that I don't believe I can add a meaningful comment on so my level isn't that high. And my length of lack of belief has little to do with my argument - I spend plenty of time engaging with atheist media and this is my area of study. But I know I cannot change your mind so I shall end the conversation here.
@Nicsnort So I reckon you believe in trending... Okay, you believe in trending and label that trending. If you don't participate... are you really there? Here? ...Bye bye and good luck trending.
@Nicsnort Why do people respond to things they don't want to respond too? If you don't like a question or post, don't want to contribute to the particular conversation...DON"T. If your only reason to respond is to make derogatory and inflammatory comments, it seems to me you could find something better to do with your time!
I do not believe we are held together at all really. In general we are liberal, but not all it say some. I cannot trust a conservative atheist, I simply do not believe it is possible-too many contradictions. I am a fiscal conservative, that is all, and even that comes with caveats.
clarkatticus
Level 7
July 7, 2018
2
I in my own way kind of agree with you. I am conservitive about some things, yet liberal about others. I don't feel the need to be labled as either.
Taking the idea of conservative atheist outside of USA, that certainly isn't a problem. It depends on what are deemed to be conservative values. There are plenty of 'conservative' Europeans who have atheistic values. The French for example are pre-disposed to atheism generally and there are many conservative ideas. The ultra-right UKIP party isn't determined by religious motivation but nationalism.
I'm not interested in "collective identity".
It's definitely not anything I'd be willing to be associated with, at least not consciously.
I don't claim to be a humanist. I'm an atheist. That's it.
KKGator
Level 9
July 7, 2018
1
Collective identity can happen whether we wish it to or not and whether we are aware of it or not. All it means is that there are things in a group which many of them have in common. For the Atheists, the number one would be "Not believing in a god" but as stated there are others many Non-theists share like the support of science and support for separation of church and state - if you also support those things (or either of the other two in the op) then we partially share in the collective identity. Having a collective identity isn't a bad thing - actually it can be very good because it allows people in groups to relate to one another and to put focus on support like causes even if they don't agree on everything else.
Broad speaking loses nuance. Nontheists have different levels of accommodation with theists. Some go further than disrespecting beliefs and start disrespecting people. It isn't wrong of me to have loved my late grandmother who was, among other better things, a zealous Catholic. When I hear contempt being expressed towards believers, rather than their ideas, I think of her.
DunchBushe
Level 4
July 7, 2018
0
Well, yes speaking in broad terms loses nuance in a sense but also when speaking of groups and collectives you cannot account for every variation - thus trends. It's just like zooming out on a topographical map, we can see regions of mountains and plains, there may be certain areas in those regions that don't fit with the rest of the surrounding geography but we still call it a mountainous region even if there are a few flat areas.
@Nicsnort I guess a significant swathe of non believers zone in on the fundamentalists, who in fairness have a vile ideology.This focus alienates natural allies for the secularist cause - liberal religious people whose only mistake is fuzzy thinking in the high faluting God debate.These folk recognize that life is complex and that empathy trumps theology. They feel caricatured by vocal atheists. In a recent Irish referendum a large number of Catholics voted on the pro choice side. Scorning the inconsistency of their thinking misses the most practical point - they voted and acted empathetically.So I'm wary of joining a club that has a significant element within it that is too disdainful of all believers.
@DunchBushe Very true, though the size of that group is hard to determine without an in-depth study of Non-theists specifically. I agree with the fact that this can alienate people that we would otherwise be allies with but only because that is how those people view all atheists to be since they are often the most vocal, or at least, the most focused on.
Think most Atheists are Humanists, Pro-Diversity, and Liberal.
sassygirl3869
Level 9
July 7, 2018
6
Agree, there’s a decent sized group of atheists in my area. We have “church” at a local coffee shop Sunday mornings and I would say we are mostly a liberal group that strongly believes in human rights.
Agree, there’s a decent sized group of atheists in my area. We have “church” at a local coffee shop Sunday mornings and I would say we are mostly a liberal group that strongly believes in human rights.
Well, according to survey data about 70% of Non-theists (in the US) identify as liberal and about 20% as moderate with only 10% being conservative. In the general population, it is pretty equal thirds - varying on either side based on the survey date and current political climate.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.