well... you don't really seem to know much about atheism... because there are no "textbook atheist dogmas"... there is no atheist dogma at all.
sure, all atheist do not believe in god, generally speaking (see below for elaboration)... but that's not dogma. in fact, you seem shaky as to what "dogma" actually means as well.
Dogma
- a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
- a doctrine or code of beliefs accepted as authoritative
nothing in atheism is declared true without proof, not even the existence or nonexistence of God. atheists don't make claims that god definitely doesn't exist, they merely state (and live their lives accordingly) that there is insufficient proof that god exists, so the presumption is that He does not.
and there is no "authority" for atheists.... there are respected speakers and authors, many of whom vary on loads of issues and points, but still manage to live without mutual proscription.
dogma is absolutely maladaptive and antithetical to free thought, and thus to atheism.
Thanks for the lecture, James!
I do however know the meaning of either word, believe it or not.
Well, if you dissect my words under a microscope, I agree, I should have added a small detail:
The "textbook" dogmas of
strong/positive atheists are IMHO as ignorant as theist-dogmas.
There is a broad spectrum to atheist ideology and if your are familiar with the often cited classification of atheists after William Rowe (see "The Cambridge Companion to Atheism" or "Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy"), then the term
strong or
positive atheist should be familiar to you.
Those people, at the extreme end of the spectrum, are the ones I'm talking about when I say "textbook-atheists". I'll agree, that phrase might no be perfect. I'm sorry, this is not my native tongue.
However... I stand by the essence of my statement.
Atheists are not a homogeneous mass, you have the extreme ends of the spectrum with strong and weak atheists and all shades in between.
Therefore, this generalization:
nothing in atheism is declared true without proof, not even the existence or nonexistence of God. atheists don't make claims that god definitely doesn't exist, they merely state (and live their lives accordingly) that there is insufficient proof that god exists, so the presumption is that He does not.
.. is not valid in context of generally defining characteristics.
There
are people who plainly and definitely
deny the existence of a higher deity. People who consider themselves atheists and are considered to be atheists by others.
The characteristics you pointed out only apply to one fraction of the "atheist mass". The ones Rowe considers to be "weak" or "negative" atheists, borderline agnostics so to say.
Dogma
* a doctrine or code of beliefs accepted as authoritative
I don't see why the doctrine of strong atheists doesn't qualify for dogmas under that criteria. They deny the existence of god and accept this believe as authoritative. And because they do, they live their lives accordingly.
Authority doesn't have to be chained to individuals or a deity.
Authority, for strong atheists, might manifest in science or simply their subconsciously shaped views and horizon of values.
As always, a pleasure discussing with you, James!