Hacker News Reader

Comment by Gustomaximus | Hacker News Reader

I'd be curious to see how atheism fits in, if for this purpose it was counted as a religion.

"I'd be curious to see how atheism fits in"

In the UK, we have a census every 10 years that tries to collect detailed information about the population. The last census was in 2011 and contained an optional question: what is your religion? The number who said they had no religion was 14.1 million which equals 25% of the population of England and Wales. This is a rise from the 2001 census where 15% of the population (of England and Wales) said they had no religion.

There was a decline in the number of people who called themselves Christian and a rise in all other minority religions.

Here's a very informative short video (4 mins) from the Office of National Statistics in the UK examining religion in England and Wales from the 2011 census.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXdZJoXuxC8

I wonder if people who identify as following no religion are more likely to answer the UK census question than people who follow a religion.

Perhaps. The video states that 7% (of the population of England and Wales) did not answer the question about religion. Also, these stats don't tell us anything about the practice of belief i.e. how religious people are. For example, are they nominally religious or actively practicing?

In New Zealand the 2013 census had 40% declared No Religion. Just under 50% are Christian, a full 12% were undeclared.

But, there's a difference between not having a religion and atheism. Atheism is the belief that there is no God.

Just because one does not have a religion does not make them atheist.

I have no religion and yet I am not an atheist.

Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god. You can categorise it into a subset of people who believe there is no god (positive atheism) and people who simply have no belief (negative atheism) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Implicit_vs._explicit

Semantics perhaps but isn't a 'belief that there is no god'? I tend to think of agnosticism as a 'lack of belief in a god'

A unicorn agnostic would say "I have no evidence for the existence of unicorns, so there may or may not be unicorns" but a unicorn atheist would say "I have no evidence for the existence of unicorns, so I don't believe unicorns exist".

It is a matter of semantics.

Agnosticism is a subset of atheism.

What if you can believe in god and have no religion?

Broadly speaking you would be a non religious theist.

If you believe a God exists and reject that it can be known through religion, that would make you a deist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

I'd be curious too but there is a big gap between no religious beliefs and Atheist. Many people just don't care about religion at all, some have mild beliefs, and some are devout, it's a broad spectrum. To some, their religious identification is more a statement of their lifestyle then their actual belief. For example my dad labels himself a Christian, despite admittedly having no actual belief because he adheres to Christian morality and it gives him a group to belong to. I've also known people identify as Buddhist because it fits closest to their lifestyle.

Unfortunately the label Atheist, has some pretty negative connotations to some people in the US.

The questions I'd really like to see: "Do your religious beliefs have an impact on your decision making" "Do you have full confidence in the core tenets of your religion" "How important is it to you to observe Religious rules?"

PS. Interesting stat, 40% of Americans claim to attend church regularly. But only 20% of Americans actually attend regularly. People often respond to polls with a more ideal version of reality. http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_rate.htm

"Unfortunately the label Atheist, has some pretty negative connotations to some people in the US."

I live in a secularized country, where identifying as an Atheist is fairly common. I am curious regarding the "negative connotations" you mentioned. Which are they, and should I avoid revealing that I identify as Atheist when I travel to the US?

Maybe just avoid making a big deal out of it. In my travels over there, it didn't seem to come up and almost everyone was really friendly.

(Also live in a country where having no religion is the norm and there are probably more negative connotations for identifying as religious.)

It's not an encompassing stereotype but US does have some evangelists and devout Christians that believe that the US is a "Christian Nation". To them Atheists are the ones that took prayer out of school and that want to take the 10 commandments monuments off court steps. So some people view Atheists as troublemakers. It's mostly a political issue.

Realize I'm talking about a small minority, but they're also vocal. I doubt you will encounter them in tourist areas. In tourist areas people are more interested in your money then your religion, it just won't come up.

But in casual conversation with strangers, I personally identify as "Not Religious" instead of "Atheist". For some reason the term Atheist carries extra baggage in US.

"The US" is awfully big. Nobody cares if you're an atheist in New York or San Francisco, but it would definitely limit your social life in Nashville.

"If you don't believe in God then what stops you from murdering people?" is a question that has been asked of atheists I know.

There are students who, having been excluded from school prayers at the behest of their atheist parents, are ostracized by the town.

There has never been an (openly) non-religious President. (And a single digit number of non-Protestant Presidents.)

A political candidate's piety, or lack thereof, is fair game for a political smear campaign.

Of course, reactions vary greatly depending on where you are. Coastal urban areas are generally much more atheist-friendly; an open atheist will, at worst, simply be looked down on by the pious. The inland "Bible belt", not so much. Atheism = devil worship, and exorcisms are a thing that are still performed.

> (And a single digit number of non-Protestant Presidents.)

If I'm not mistaken, that number is 1 (JFK).

Thomas Jefferson was an unchurched Deist.

The Carolinas are more part of the bible belt than much of the Midwest.

(I've spent lots of time in Midwest areas that are well described as 'very Christian' and it simply isn't something that comes up. People certainly aren't talking about any exorcisms they have going on. I guess much of that time has accidentally been in areas with lots of Catholics and lots of not so evangelical protestants.)

I'm going to go out on a limb and be a little controversial here: Just for reference I'm a non-American with a very strong scientific background and also a non-confrontational and personal Christian.

For me, some American and a few European atheists appear to be as devout as the most strongly religious people I know. They are judgemental of others' beliefs, are absolutely convinced that their views are correct and disparage anyone who is even open or agnostic towards philosophical questions like whether there could be anything external to the Universe. These people dismiss any branch of rationality that is not directly measurable or quantifiable, and on one occasion I had to correct one by saying "yes, philosophy does actually serve a purpose, as a guide for which scientific questions we should tackle next".

That's a negative connotation I get when I meet someone who goes out of their way to let me know they're atheist. (This is a generalization which of course needs to be carefully balanced).

Then there's my brother who as a young adult filling in some sort of form asked "Mum, what religion am I?"

If you have to ask like that, you'd best put nothing.

I'm curious, too, since it seems to be completely unmentioned. Did they take atheists and agnostics into account at all? I can't tell.

It doesn't answer the question, but Wikipedia has some interesting information on "irreligion" in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_United_States

I'm going to guess they didn't. Most nationwide surveys generally indicate that "no religion" outnumbers all the other minority religions combined, so if they had the maps would presumably have been a lot more boring.

The Pew Center has some interesting research about "religious unaffiliation."[1] Unaffiliated is the second largest religious identification by a large margin at 16%, Judaism is the third largest group at 1.8%.[2]

The Global Religious Landscape Report has some interesting figures for the world population. Religiously unaffiliated was the third largest reported/identified group in the survey at 16.3% just barely nudging out Hinduism at 15%.[3]

[1] http://www.pewresearch.org/topics/religiously-unaffiliated/ Growth in US Specifically http://www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise/ and http://www.pewforum.org/2013/07/02/growth-of-the-nonreligiou...

[2] Page 50 http://www.pewforum.org/files/2014/01/global-religion-full.p...

[3] http://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscap...

So, this dataset isn't broken down by state (just region), but it looks at what religion Americans say they have (including "None"), how that has changed over time since 1972, and how that differs by region: https://www.statwing.com/open/datasets/09f43e516bb656df54c54...

Pulled from the General Social Survey, which is an absolute goldmine of interesting stuff like this.

Not what you after, but the best countries to be atheist in: http://www.salon.com/2012/08/29/eight_of_the_best_countries_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_Czech_Republ...

[corrected per namenotrequired's comment]

Small correction, it's "eight of the best countries to be atheist in", not "the most atheist countries".

"Slowly but surely, religion’s historical monopoly on the human mind is breaking apart."

I'm currently reading a book[1] by theologian/philosopher David Bentley Hart that shames to ground sentences like this. Also the idea that modernity is somehow superior to previous ages in regard to tolerance and reason. Nothing further from the truth.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Atheist-Delusions-Christian-Revolution...

"Hart closes the book in the present, delineating the ominous consequences of the decline of Christendom in a culture that is built upon its moral and spiritual values."

It seems that he doesn't claim in this book that religions monopoly isn't diminishing but rather reaffirms this fact at the same time expressing his opinion that it's bad.

You're correct. I chose to wrong quote to point out that in fact reason is not gaining any ground as religious authority fades away.

Instead of merely citing the author as an authority and stating your interpretation of his thesis, please offer some details from the source to back up your claim. Especially when asserting something that goes against prevailing wisdom, such as your statement that previous ages displayed equal or superior tolerance and reason. Dropping a link to a book doesn't make your points any more credible unless the book is free to read.

Some people buys books, you know. Unless you think that interwebz is for smart people that don't need to read books, or form comments are enough to build the 'prevailing wisdom'.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com