Monsters in TROS = UFO's in real world...

[Ingenious]

Yes, depicting atheism as a faith irks me as well. Atheism is the complete opposite of faith. It is the non-belief in a God or Gods, a 'higher power' etc. And don't to get me started on the theories of non-existance after death. Atheism does not necessarily mean that there is the non-belielf of an after-life. I have known many athesits that beleive in some form of life after death. Whether there is a consciousness in this after-life is another question to ask.  Now, let's take a look at agnosticism. This being defined as 'the belief that there can be no proof either that god exists or that god does not exist'. So an atheist actively denies the existance of a God, where-as an agnostic doesn't care because they beleive there is no certainty about the whole thing. So you could honestly have an agnostic in a foxhole that happens to be praying in order to cover his ass if there IS a god AND an after-life...
*shrug*

-Ingenious
Oh, contra.. for an atheist to pray in a foxhole because he has little to lose would not make a difference as to which God he prayed to... because he doesn't beleive in any.. so if an atheist in a foxhole were to pray... I'm sure he'd just pray to all of them... to further cover his ass.

[Ian Charvill]

So an atheist actively denies the existance of a God

Which is an assertion without proof and hence an act of faith (though not necessarily a system of faith).

There's a, my recollection isn't perfect, I think it's a Kim Stanley Robinson short story from Songbirds of Pain, about an English convert to islam.  The character comments that in times of crisis he reverts to Christian prayers, and I would suspect similar things about athiests in foxholes (if that particular hoary old cliche has some truth behind it) - that they would revert to the religion of their childhood or culture.

I think if an athiest were scared enough to pray that they would not be rational enough to plan their prayers with any particular care.

I suspect if a RoS athiest with Faith "There are no supernatural things" is probably due a rewritten SA.

[Jake Norwood]

Ian brings up an interesting point. While differences in understanding over the term "Faith" could lead some to misunderstand what I'm about to say, bear with me.

Atheism is not a religion per-se. There is no established doctrine (and in some cases, not even rejection of doctrine). However, it does take an element of faith (much for the reasons that Ian stated). It is also much like a religion in that many an atheist has an opinion about the afterlife, often "nothing." Others say "I don't know," which is less likely to be interpreted as a statment of faith.

It is my experience also, as a person who acted as full-time clergy for two years, that so-called "devout" atheists are the more inclined to push their non-faith upon others (or do "missionary work") than do the most devout Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, 7th Day Adventists, or Southern Baptists. Some atheists will say this comes from a desire to clear away the lies/idiocy/whatever of those that foolishly buy into the idea of God or of organized religion, etc. In other words, their reasons end up sounding remarkably like the reasons that motivate any pro-theist missionary, pious crusader, or --gasp-- preacher.

Atheism is, by definition, a belief structure. There are many interpretations of what Atheism is "to you," but the same is true not only among Christian sects, but among individual catholics who technically subscribe to the same catechism.

My feeling on the Faith SA is that an Atheist qualifies for it if they're willing to try and proselytize, convert, or "pass the truth on" despite personal discomfort (arguments classify as personal discomfort to me). That they stand up for their disbelief in an environment that doesn't appreciate their opinion. This may be driven by some believe in "Truth" (I find that many of the atheists I know, if they aren't too bitter, are very interested in the idea of "truth," and although I didn't usually agree with them on the source of truth, I did agree that I was searching for the same thing as a religious man). Is not the search for truth what leads to some kind of faith? The SA sets in when you think you've found truth, or at least the path to it. To a lesser degree, it also sets in when you're sure that it isn't one of the aforementioned roads.

This is the reason that faith and truth are ambiguous in TROS. This is the stuff that drives men and nations, and any setting where the "truth" is pre-settled because the gods walk among us is missing out on the greatest source of human conflict EVAR.

Jake

[Salamander]

The character comments that in times of crisis he reverts to Christian prayers, and I would suspect similar things about athiests in foxholes (if that particular hoary old cliche has some truth behind it) - that they would revert to the religion of their childhood or culture.

As an aside, not if your a Gurkha, they take bets on whether their fellow gurkhas on the Machine Gun Crew will survive the sniper shooting at them...

So far a very interesting conversation here, and directly relevant to one of the problems I faced in my Renaissance Campaign. I included monsters and magic in my world, but had decided to make them both very subtle, secretive even...

So far the party has encountered two monsters and heard the rumblings of a third and fourth. The first two monsters were a Ghul and a Walking Dead respectively, both of which got the attention of the whole party pretty quickly. The others were rumours of a Tatzel Wurm (Germans have the coolest monstrous legends!) and a Gol. Naturally they went "buh" and the PC who encountered the Ghul ran like a scared little girl (quietly with his skirts lifted up to increase stride) and the whole party encountered the Walking Dead, immediately after which they all began to enquire into training and purchase of bigger weapons.

If they were to mention these encounters to anybody, they know full well that they will be tagged as mad and from there it is a short walk to the pyres of herectics and witches... Thier boss has ordered the burning of more than one pile of foes in recent memory and I am patiently waiting to see if they figure it out. One player has, and he is really diggin' it. Not only do we have to think of the Inquisition as a tool to keep everybody in line and hunt for witches, but as a tool used to hide the evidence that the local tales just might have more weight to them, a bad thing for organized religion.

Magic is much the same. You cast a spell carelessly, expect somebody to come for you with a small army and maybe a sorceror of their own. Remember that the Clergy were studying such things in earnest back then...

I have even had one PC outed by his own hand, and he was the subject of debate for many days amongst his superiors before he finally caved and swore a binding oath to his boss. If he had failed to do so, I am sure the Inquisition would have been called in from a discreet distance...

So in essence, it is pretty easy to build the monsters and magic into your world, just be sure to do so in a way to make sense to you and your players. I was lucky, I had history to do most of the work for me!

[Ingenious]

Having spent many a wasteful time in the Atheist vs Christian debate room(around 2 years worth, off and on).. Jake's point of 'truth' is exactly what I forgot to mention. Oh the times to be had listening to the banter in there... many offers of evidence from one side to the other. One saying their 'holy book' WAS the proof, etc... and the atheists just dismissing this with a grin and a pointing and laughing session, and then pointing out that too many sects of Christianity have twisted the Bible to say whatever they wanted it to say, thus using it as a control measure(which is all I think of it as). Most of the christians tried to convert the atheists chatters.. but to no avail. However, the entire thing was about proving one side over the other(thus trying to convert)... so this is a very valid point in terms of atheism being a 'faith' SA.. also read the definition of what faith is:

faith:
noun
1. confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. 2. belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. c synonyms at belief, trust. 3. loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters. 4. often faith(christianity) the theological virtue defined as secure belief in god and a trusting acceptance of god's will. 5. the body of dogma of a religion: the muslim faith. 6. a set of principles or beliefs.
idioms
in faith indeed; truly.
etymology
middle english, from anglo-norman fed, from latin fid*s; c bheidh- in indo-european roots.
And so forth.
So by the first definition the faith of an atheist is possible, regardless of trying to 'convert the idiots'.

-Ingenious
To bring the Matrix into this, the matrix was a means to control everyone's minds right? And wouldnt religion therefore be the first matrix?

[contracycle]

Hmm, well, I agree that the big issue here is Truth but take a slightly different approach.  Yes, it is normal for people to seek some sort of worldview - I would go so far as to say, something rather like a Lumpley principle of consensus on how the world is and works.  But I strongly dislike the painting of the skeptical position re the claims of divinity as equivalent in terms of the nature of those "beliefs".  What bugged me about religion was the emphasis on faith *rather* than evidence, even the claim that if there were evidence, faith would be worthless.  This is making a virtue of ignorance, the very antithesis of a serach for truth.

Some like to distinguish between weak atheism and strong atheism; I'm an advocate of strong atheism and am willing to claim that there is no god.  I do so not by trying to disprove the existance of god - which cannot be done as you cannot prove a negative - but by providing an alternate thesis for the origin of *claims* of god.  One thing that is often forgotten in this debate is that we are not discussing an observation external and common to us, but only discussing the claims made by a particular group.  If I say the claims originate from some other cause - such as the stucturing of social heirarchy - which satisfactorily explains the church and its claims to have knowledge of god, then I have pretty much disposed of god too.  I don't need to get bogged down in trying to eff the ineffable.

From this perspective as well, I can resolve the problem of proselytising atheists.  If I have an *opinion* on some matter, I can be just as pushy and as much of an advocate.  If I like a book and recommend it to someone, I am likely to do so strongly, enthusiastically.  Similarly, if I have a view of truth I find compelling, I'm likely to advocate that too.  My criticism of religion is not based on proselitism, it is based on supernaturalism; that is, it seems to me, supernaturalism is not as fruitful a line of enquiry as materialism.  And obviously, as Jake points out, it is the search for truth, and methodologies of truth, which is important becuase those views and tools determine action.  Atheists are just as enthusiastic about their vioew of reality as theists, and may also feel a sense of urgency in disseminating that view.  But these similarities do not, to me, make supernaturalism and materialism equivalent per se.

[Ashren Va'Hale]

yeah, this didn't go off topic at all....

[Salamander]

yeah, this didn't go off topic at all....

I'm trying to get us back there!!! :D

[Ashren Va'Hale]

probably ought to split it right when it went into the faith debate....

[kenjib]

The burden of proof lies on the person making the assertion, not the person denying it given the lack of any demonstrable and decisive evidence.  That's the problem with trying to say that atheism is faith.  It implies a parallelism where it does not at all exist.

It's a very similar logical fallacy to straw man, or when people try to prove something by proving some only vaguely related analogy instead.