Atheists are by nature not open to being told what is right or wrong but through personal experience and indeed actual studies they are generally more moral than theists. What would the community of atheists feel about a book that communicated basic human morality as an atheist that would be beneficial for everyone for social and progressive reasons? Would they support a standardized moral code? What would that look like? Would it need to be rigid or change over time and be fluid? Is there anything out there that is comparable already? Is it accessible, like readable for the masses?
It's easy to list atheist principles.
I do not believe the claims tht a god/s exists.
That is all atheism is to me.
Basic atheist principles:
Done.
@Akfishlady Lol sure ... but that would be more a humanistic principle. Unfortunately, you can fit the definition of "atheist" while being a dick.
@Akfishlady My point is, the question "how should we then live?" is not an atheist question it is just a human question. I suppose we're so used to religion mediating moral and ethical questions that we feel a need to come up with an alternative to that. My position is that the alternative already exists, religion just kidnapped it a long time ago and claims to have invented and nurtured it. That is to say, we've always had societal morality. But sure ... don't be a dick is a good general way to put it.
I definitely do not want anyone telling me what code of conduct I need to follow. We don't need a bible.
I couldnt vote for any of teh above because I think there isnt an option there to just say 'no' and I don't want to agree with the attitude that 'no one tells me what to do.' which sounds belligerant . I don't think that there are or even could be atheist principles mostly because we are all different people we all have our own principles and being without a god is just that - I wouldn't want that book written as it would bring fixity to something that is beautifully (for me ) fluid - My atheism is of very little account to me I don't feel its in any way a part of my life, it is a non starter, so unimportant . I am here to get away from the holy yins. end of!
Atheism has no principals. It is not a thing in and of itself.
It is the lack of theism.
Do you call the lack of wearing hats "principals of the hatless"?
Or hairstyles?
Do good. Be kind. Hospitals and schools above churches. Good deed s over prayer, and reason over faith. Plus, don't be a dick.
Don't be a dick! Hear hear
I don’t need help to figure out right from wrong. One of the arguments against religion is that we don’t need religion to be moral. Treat people as you would like to be treated and don’t be a dick. That’s short enough to put on a bumper sticker. However, if you can give good arguments for such a book I’ll keep an open mind.
I’m personally not interested in defining any part of being a free thinker. I mean no disrespect but I think you head down the road like organized religion by definitions and rules. In other words we all march one way. Then when someone thinks differently, you encourage schisms. That’s my short answer. I think you get me. ?
i feel the same
Hmm. Interesting question.
While I think humanity might benefit from such a book, I'm not so sure the target audience are atheist.
As far as something comparable, some would argue that any 'Holy Book' was attempting this very thing.
Laws and regulations are also in the running, I suppose.
I didn't vote because the list is missing several important possibilities. A book of this nature would in essence be a codification of things that should come easily to anyone who thinks even a little bit. Would it be of any real interest to the atheists in the world? Maybe to some, but not to all.
One of the most common tactics of theists is to try to reframe atheism as a positive claim ("there are no gods" vs "I reject your god claim due to lack of evidence" ), or an anti-religion religion. I think there are two reasons for this.
The first more charitable one is that in their worldview religion and atheism must be analogous. If you're not Christian, Muslim, Hindu or whatever then you're something else with its own set of beliefs and principles. This isn't the case, but could be an honest mistake.
The second reason, and the reason I don't think it's valuable to create atheistic principles, is that it's unnecessary. As it stands every religion makes positive claims. Many of them are demonstrably false and don't have any evidence. Playing on their home field is easy because they have to defend nonsense. Making the positive claim that there isn't a god shifts the responsibility on us to prove a negative which is impossible. Attaching principles to that claim provides a list of things that atheists can disagree about, become defensive, then dogmatic about. And that'd be dumb.
We're always right when we say "I reject your god claim, please provide evidence". And that's all that's required to be atheist.
rant over. thanks for reading.
Don't Panic. Always have a towel. Never ask a Vogon to recite poetry.
The most perfect principles ever.
Because Vogon poetry makes brains melt. I don't have enough of those to let them drip out my ears.
Sounds interesting would be very difficult-many types of atheists,agnostics and freethinkers.
There is only one atheist value - lack of belief in the supernatural.
I think you are asking about other values that atheists seem to have in common. However, the lack of belief does not really say much about the values of any atheist. Just look at the recent sexual problems of Laurance Kraus and David Silverman or the crazy racist crap from Mythist Milaukee.
There is a predoment humanist streak from atheists, maybe out of empathy as we come out of religion and experience being isolated or outcast from your former group of friends.
I also like to object to the first part of the first sentence of the question "Atheists are by nature not open to being told what is right or wrong"
If a rule is put in place to limit speeding I am totally open to that, If I have to pay taxes I am fine with that. If the government screws up I have (in most countries) an option to vote against them next time. Atheists are (can be) great citizens, Atheism and Anarchism are different things.
I think that many of the other posts are demonstrating that many atheists reject the suggestion of being told anything.
Why does anyone need a book of morals. Most atheists say that they don't need to have a religion or a book to know right from wrong, or have morals. Religious people often ask how atheists can do what is right without a belief in god. I think the answer is that, if you don't know what is right a bible, a book of morals, or religion won't help you.
Here is my deeper meaning behind the question...
Atheism is indeed the complete lack of belief in deities. Belief in deities is theism. Theist beliefs also have a set of guidelines that they follow. Let's just say that they are very diverse. Ten commandments, Leviticus, incarnation of Vishnu, etc... I do not believe that atheists are without morals despite that fact. In fact, my experience is the opposite. Atheists have a higher moral code. That moral code is not specifically written out. In some ways humanistic beliefs are also atheist beliefs but in my opinion, from what I've read, not really.
I think that there would be value in an atheist moral code written down. It would deflect from the accusations that atheists are immoral which I already said was generally untrue. Atheists are diverse so that isn't ? but let's just say that I think that many atheists could find common ground.
Agnostics are by definition still uncertain of their loyalty. They doubt theism but they have at least one theistic belief that they are partially devoted. For some agnostics they believe in Christian or Muslim belief or others too. They have that moral code tied to their uncertainty whether they reject it or not. So my question was also for them but in a lesser sense. Humanism fits agnostic beliefs very well. In my opinion, less so for atheists. Certainly haven't found an answer for me. I'm still looking or actually formulating.
I see value in having a good easily accessible starting point. It took me more than 30 years to get to where I am now and I feel like much of it was wasted on arguing with theists. Even if not all atheists agree, it could be a great jumping off point,somewhere several steps beyond theism.
And kick the soapbox out from under me... lol
I'm beginning to believe that those who cannot accept that atheism's meaning is merely no god belief, are frustrated agnostics. It is similar to non related blue eyed people having nothing in common at all except for a recessive gene, needing a moral code or something similar. You can be totally moral or amoral and be a theist or an atheist. It has no reflection on either.