Atheism and Agnosticism in the Birth Chart


Atheism and Agnosticism in the Birth Chart.

It should be said that this too is from a sphere of mytology and belief (or let´s say from a philosophical view outside of naturalism).

However, in principal i find atheist arguments to be just as unscientific, unhistorical, biased, ethnocentric, and downright unintellectual as many religous ones.

And why shouldent they be?

Both are belief systems after all.

Atheism or theism, neither has any base whatsoever in science (one of them just pretend to).

In the first video the young, atheist , girl equates “conclusion” with “truth”, already proving that her knowledge of philosophy are not nearly good enough to make a video on the rationalityof religous belief or practice.

She also says that a lot of trangressions against humanity are because of religion / belief.

In fact, very little of that has been done for purely religous reasons.

Most conflicts have had a whole complex of reasons where religous sense of group identity has been very useful.

People, btw, have been killed in the name of atheism too (for instance in communist regimes).

She also, like so many Christians cant understand or respect that everyone just doesent get “saved” like her. Why not simply agree with her?

The world would be a much better place if you did. Hallelujah!

“Can i get an atheism saves brothers and sisters?”

5 thoughts on “Atheism and Agnosticism in the Birth Chart

  1. “Both are belief systems after all.”

    Actually, they’re not.

    Atheism is a single position about a single issue. It’s certain part of many worldviews, but it isn’t a worldview in and of itself. Remember, many Buddhists are atheists. And they have dramatically different worldviews than I do.

    “People, btw, have been killed in the name of atheism too (for instance in communist regimes).”

    No, actually, they haven’t. People have been killed by atheists. But it’s essentially impossible to kill someone ‘in the name of atheism’. It just doesn’t make sense.

  2. Buddhists are not atheists, they are nontheists witch isnt exactly the same.
    So are many Taoists and Konfucians ( and those who are not are generally transtheists).

    Even a single position is grounded in an ontology, a world view and thus a belief system. Having said that, i am aware that there are several types of atheists.

    If the counter argument is that the idea of no Deity is PART of that belief system, the same could be said for many religous positions.

    After all, the existanse of Deity / Deities is not the entire belief system of a theist either.

    It might not make sense to kill people over their beliefs, but if you kill someone because they are stupid and superstitous and belive in a God, then you have killed in the name of atheism.

    Saying anything else is merely semantics.
    Pol Pot, Mao,Stalin all had people put to death because they belived in a God (any God).

    • “After all, the existanse of Deity / Deities is not the entire belief system of a theist either.”

      Never claimed they were. My point is, atheism is the equivalent of theism. Not the equivalent of a whole religion.

      “but if you kill someone because they are stupid and superstitous and belive in a God, then you have killed in the name of atheism.”

      And none of the people you mentioned did that.

      They killed because the religious authorities competed against their authority.

  3. I agree that atheism is equivalent to theism. For it to be a “religion” it would have to have some sort of practice. A belief system however is just a view on existence.

    From an anthropological point of view the term “religion” is kind of pointless anyway but i would claim that atheism was under that wobbly and broad umbrella.

    https://marcelgomessweden.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/religion-gods-faith-culture-ethnocentrism-lives-and-prospers/

    I agree that these despots killed as a response to a (percieved) threat to their authority.

    However, not only a religion, a cult within culture or an institution is such a threat but the very idea of theism itself questions their athority.

    Thus these regimes where not only against religion but theism as such.

    Otherwise they would have killed in the name of irreligion rather than atheism.
    The ideologies of those mentioned as well as Kim Il Sung is averse to theism itself, as a concept (opium for the masses argument) regardless of what form it takes (exept for making them demi Gods ofcourse).

    The way i see it intolerance, fundamentalism and disrespect is equally ugly regardless of where it comes from.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s