I have never liked the comparison that a person who has religious belief is infected with some sort of “virus.” I understand the logic and the eloquent explanation of those who hold this view. I don’t even like the explanation that it is a delusion even though this concept can be substantiated if you manipulate the definition of delusion to conform to the idea that religious practices are oppressive, insulting, and completely irrational, not to mention, man-made, therefore untrue.

I have found myself at times stating that religious beliefs are delusional, only to find that I am at odds with myself. I pushed these feelings aside for some time simply to conform to what many atheists believe. I think many atheists believe this simply because of the “God Delusion” by Dawkins. I think he coined the phrase in a masterful way to give a wake-up call to the absurdity of the belief systems of religious and the harm it can cause humanity. I am not arguing with the concepts that Dawkins wrote about, or even saying that he is wrong.

I do however believe profoundly differently. I take a sociological approach to religion. I think Max Weber got it right in his profound work, “The Sociology of Religion.” His historical analysis begins with a simple…very simple premise: People pursue their interests. Weber is an idealist like myself, (why I like him so much…) His approach to say that ideas are the major influence human action is spot on. Ann Swidler writes: “He does not argue that ideas always or necessarily influence action. He does try to understand variation in the influence of ideas on action.” From these building blocks, “he builds a powerful theory to explain why some kinds of cultural systems have much more influence on economic and political action than others do. He analyzes the critical historical contingencies that determine whether and how ideas guide action.” Furthermore, “Weber argues that once a religion is sufficiently “rationalized” – systematized and unified – its core religious ideas come to have a logic of their own.”

His Verstehen approach (interpretive) allows for a more empathetic, and participatory approach, (notice I did not say condoning approach) towards the understanding, of religion in general.

My own feelings towards the matter: I do not believe religion is a phenomenon we should be hostile towards. Religion is nothing more than a sociological concept. I do believe we should separate the phenomenon itself from the ideas and actions of the individuals who perpetuate, teach, and try to implement, or force into our society. The difference being that we can ultimately evaluate and see religion on an empathic basis rather, than a force to be eliminated.

Religion has evolved with us and through us and has formed much of what we see in culture today. The ideas and actions are what can be poisonous if used (or misused) to have power and control over another person(s), or entity. Just as we would take an approach to rid our society of an imbalance of power and control, (we already do this with other sociological problems such as domestic violence) we can also make a more positive impact politically and interpersonally. I believe the key to being heard and having a TRUE lasting impact, is to take a sociological approach to understanding, and to use this knowledge to rationalize and demonstrate why the atheist position is the more mature approach for humanity. It would seem to me that we might actually see a change in public (religious) opinion, persona, stereotype, and awareness of what atheist actually stand for.


Views: 2349

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I certainly would hire someone who thinks Elvis is still alive no matter how qualified they are. However, It is ILLEGAL to not hire someone because they believe that the Pope has performed a miracle. Well, maybe I don't want that kind of person working for me.

All belief in a religion is, in my opinion, delusional, and until you mentioned it, I've never even associated that opinion with Richard Dawkins, and in fact, held it long before he ever published his book.

But to a degree, you are right - religion is not the enemy, the religious are - without them, religion would die a long overdue death.

But to a degree, you are right - religion is not the enemy, the religious are - without them, religion would die a long overdue death.

The religious are not the enemy either. I came on this forum as a Christian and you were my first friend on TA. Did you consider me your enemy?


That's pretty fucked up.

It could also be not entirely true --*:x lovestruck

I'm watching "House" re-runs. House is criticizing prayer, and the fact that it doesn't work. He says, "Little boys pray for jetpaks, priests pray for little boys - no, wait, that last one actually works out --"

So tell me why you think I'm wrong Arch. You obviously do.

Don't you know when I'm just screwin' with you?

You're always screwing with me Arch! LOL!!!! Don't you know that I like to scrap? You're not making it very easy right now.

Ok - here's the thing - I find it difficult to respect the opinions of those who believe in the supernatural, which makes it difficult for me to have rational conversations with them about anything more than the most superficial topics.

I'm not saying you're wrong, for you, but your methods wouldn't work for me, because I couldn't pull it off and keep a straight face.

What about a poker face?
................Wait a minute....................was that an admonition that I am.........RIGHT? It almost sounded that way. Does el Pajarito admit weakness?


Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin



Favorite movie or actor/actress.

Started by Devlin Cuite in Small Talk. Last reply by Gallup's Mirror 1 minute ago. 1 Reply


  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service