What Atheists Understand the Least About Religion
Religion is a subjective concept generally defined as a cultural set of various beliefs and moral codes pertaining to humanity and their relationship with the spiritual; that is, the immaterial, or that which cannot be directly interpreted via conventional sciences. This piece will hereby mostly refer to religion through the term "theism," as it invokes the image of religion in the metaphysical sense rather than the cultural sense.
There are many different religions which all make varying claims on the reality of existence and morality. One thing these theistic traditions share in common, particularly the more philosophical ones like Islam and Christianity, is that many atheists (those who reject all religions) seem to always misunderstand the sincerity of their adherents.
Why May Atheists Misunderstand Theism?
A major factor in many atheists misrepresenting theism may be their view of all religions and their teachings as simply archaic rulebooks rulers use to control the masses under the guise of upholding ancient, "outdated" morality. This makes debates impossible, as atheists who hold the aforementioned attitude regarding theism end up using arguments against theism falling under logical fallacies such as strawmanning or appeal to emotion. Such fallacious arguments stem from ignoring the core of every organised religion: attempts at making objective metaphysical truth claims.
Examples of Atheists Misunderstanding Theism
- My great friend, Sierra, gave me permission to include this part. She is a great friend and a proud Muslim, and she is also bisexual. There is no inherent contradiction here; it is totally feasible for Sierra to believe there is no god but God and that Muhammad ibn Abdullah was His final prophet while feeling romantic and/or sexual attraction to both males and females. But, numerous atheists have told her to just go ahead and leave Islam, as they seemingly wrongly think a Muslim is someone who is heterosexual, not someone who believes in Islamic metaphysical truth claims.
- Many oppose theism due to a perception of organised religion supposedly being a tool of oppression and capitalism. This is a rubbish objection to theism as it is rooted in the aforementioned misunderstanding of theism as simply archaic rulebooks, not systems explaining why we are here and what purpose we should strive towards. What should be tackled are the metaphysical claims religions make, not the opinions historical societies may have had on the division of labour or gender norms which they used subjective scriptural interpretations to justify.
- This somewhat relates to the previous point. As a Muslim, I have been asked why I follow Islam despite it being supposedly "oppressive" and God supposedly being "tyrannical" for putting people in Hell. I reject such claims. But, even if I were to accept them, they do not negate the logical and metaphysical claims Islam attempts to make. I wholeheartedly believe there is no god but God, who is just, omniscient, and able to do whatever He wishes due to His omniscience completely justifying all His decisions; that He has angels serving him; that He has communicated to humanity via various books and messengers, with the Quran and Muhammad ibn Abdullah ﷺ being the last book and messenger, respectively; and in predestination, the Day of Judgement, Heaven, and Hell. All of this is as true to me as "2 + 2 = 4," and to convince me otherwise must require arguments with logical and metaphysical sustenance, not emotional labels.
- German antireligious writer Karl Marx compared theism to opium, saying religion is a cope for people to deal with oppressive circumstances. I am not trying to write a full critique of Karl Marx or Marxism here; however, this specific statement from Marx is wrong, at least when applied to more knowledgeable theists. I, like other Muslims, follow Islam as I believe there is no god but God who created humanity for the purpose of worshipping Him and communicated to us via the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, not because I view Islam as a convenient cope from reality.
Overall Conclusion
This piece is not intended to be a big critique of atheism, antitheism, antireligion, deism, agnosticism, communism, or Marxism. It is a critique of ignorant, illogical strawmanning that prevents intellectual discussions from happening. I also obviously do not believe all atheists share this mind set, nor do I think they are all completely ignorant; on the contrary, there are various thinkers I admire who rejected religions, such as David Hume and various proponents of Marxism. I hope more people can take religious metaphysical claims seriously when questioning them after reading this instead of continuing to poorly argue against them via different logical fallacies. Additionally, I think nearly everything here can also apply to certain flawed theistic critiques of other religions.
Atheist response no-one asked for:
ReplyDeleteI think you're correct to suggest that some atheists do misunderstand religion in the ways that you've highlighted, but I think that an atheist who sincerely tries to understand religion will overcome these misunderstandings. I might also suggest that an atheist critique of the "outdated" morality upheld by religion holds more weight than you give it credit for. Of course "Religion says that people go to hell. I think that's bad, therefore religion is false." is a fallacious appeal to emotion, but "Religion claims that immoral things are moral", while it might use emotive language (because without a creator in which to base our morality, atheists might take an ethical emotivist view), is a valid critique. For example if the truth claims of Christianity suggest that a good God condones slavery, which most people would agree is not good, it is fair to become suspicious of those truth claims.
Also, while Marx absolutely was antireligious, the famous quote that "religion is the opiate of the people" does not mean that religious people do not have legitimate reasons for following their religion, only following it to cope with the harsh conditions of reality; the sahabah did not convert because life was tough, but because they believed they were in the presence of a prophet of God. Rather, Marx suggests that religion takes on a role as a painkiller, helping people - who may be religious for a variety of reasons - cope with the pains of life. For instance, I've heard close friends say that being religious helps to deal with news regarding the genocide in Gaza, because they know that the perpetrators will suffer a dreadful punishment, and the victims shall enjoy a heavenly reward. Of course, that's not the reason that my friends are religious, it's just a bonus. I think this quote is often misunderstood, especially by leftists who want to disillusion their religious comrades and "liberate" them from religion as an "oppressive tool of the state". Of course, this only pushes them away from leftism.
I get that, and obviously there is objective morality out there that we should judge beliefs by (otherwise one would have to say the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza is not objectively wrong). However, I feel this often gets twisted into "any belief system that does not hold every insignificant sociopolitical opinion/culture war stance I hold is evil" (this especially gets applied to the major denominations of mainstream Abrahamic religions regarding their stances on issues like LGBTQ+ and abortion).
DeleteI agree with you on informed atheists being able to overcome such misunderstandings, which is why I praise such atheists such as David Hume for at least having actual philosophical arguments against theism.
I have also heard the explanation you gave on Marx's quote before, but I have seen more hardline antireligious Marxists (particularly online; yes, I know the internet does not represent reality, but still) not give it the same nuance you give, and they happen to make up a lot of the leftist spaces I lurk in.
frrrrr internet marxists often need to touch grass icl
Delete