It’s a very complex topic, but to put it as succinctly as possible, the key difference is between self-declared atheists who truly appear as such, and those who insist on their atheism, but various quasi-religious elements are nevertheless clearly discernible in their lives and worldviews (to the point where I would dispute whether it makes sense to exclude them from the general definition of “religion”).
Overall, my impression is that among the atheists found in North America, those of the latter kind are far more frequent and prominent compared to the post-Communist Eastern Europe, with Western Europe being somewhere in-between, but closer to North America. (Of course, these large geographical regions contain parts of greatly different religiosity, but what I write tends to be true for the local atheists found there regardless of their percentage in the local population.) Why this is so, and what exact quasi-religious elements are commonly seen among different sorts of self-declared non-religious people, are complex and fascinating questions, which are however difficult to discuss because they touch on many ideologically sensitive issues.
When I read people’s writings on all sorts of issues, I can usually discern the two types of atheists pretty quickly and reliably, and based on your comments I’ve read in this thread and elsewhere, you do seem to belong to the true sort like you declare. Assuming you’re writing from somewhere in Europe or the Anglosphere, as most people here are, this by itself places a significant probability on you being Eastern European, and more specifically from one of the less religious EE states, like Hungary, Czech Republic, or various former Soviet republics (as opposed to much more religious places like Poland or Croatia). Considering that your username is the word for “piglet” in several (but not all) Slavic languages, one of which is Czech, this seemed like a high-probability guess. Also, some additional evidence is that your English is excellent but still a little bit Slavic-souding, and your writing has a slight and vague quality typical of Central Europe that is very hard to explain. (By the way, if you’re curious, I’m Croatian.)
Overall, my impression is that among the atheists found in North America, those of the latter kind are far more frequent and prominent compared to the post-Communist Eastern Europe
This is probably in agreement with my anecdotal experience, but I haven’t realised it explicitly before. What I can think about at the moment is the webpage Daylight Atheism, whose author had spent a lot of time defending the concept of atheist spirituality (e.g. here), and there was usually surprisingly little opposition in the comments.
your username is the word for “piglet” in several (but not all) Slavic languages, one of which is Czech
It means simply “pig” in Czech.
(By the way, if you’re curious, I’m Croatian.)
My original idea was that you were Russian, and after reading your previous comment, I have put a non-negligible probability to you being Czech too; hence, my nationality-predicting abilities are visibly inferior to yours.
your English is excellent but still a little bit Slavic-souding
Can you identify some specific instances of Slavic sounding structures in my writing? It could help me to eliminate them.
This is probably in agreement with my anecdotal experience, but I haven’t realised it explicitly before. What I can think about at the moment is the webpage Daylight Atheism, whose author had spent a lot of time defending the concept of atheist spirituality (e.g. here), and there was usually surprisingly little opposition in the comments.
I don’t have in mind only such overt manifestations of quasi-religiosity, but also the way many people find beliefs and causes that technically don’t involve any supernatural elements, yet nevertheless become objects of mystical reverence in their lives, and are altogether impervious to any rational discussion. In many cases, I would argue that such beliefs effectively involve postulating the existence of metaphysical entities which, while not anthropomorphic, are no less imaginary than the deities postulated by various traditional religions. (One philosopher who made some original and radical inquiries along these lines was Max Stirner.) But this is a really difficult and controversial topic.
Can you identify some specific instances of Slavic sounding structures in my writing? It could help me to eliminate them.
One thing that’s almost impossibly difficult for Slavic speakers is the use of articles, and you sometimes drop them in a quite Slavic-sounding way (I still do it occasionally too). However, these are just small and occasional things; your English is at a near-native level, and very well written overall. (Also, I should note that I probably notice this sort of thing more than a typical reader because I have a hobbyist interest in linguistics.)
Why do you think that is? Longer history of atheism?
I do think that “converts” (either to a religion or to atheism) think differently than people who were raised in their current belief system. If you’re childhood was religious, then you’ll associate religion with childhood and your parents, either negatively (“religion is childish”) or positively (“religion is comforting.”)
I suppose the history of atheism, measured by many reasonable criteria, is actually longer in North America than in Eastern Europe. Yes, the atheism was state sponsored for 40-50 years in Eastern European countries (70 years in the Soviet union), but it was often imposed on thoroughly religious societies. Practically all intellectual innovations were coming from the West.
Some possible (not experimentally tested and probably false) causes of the differences in atheists’ thinking:
1) The communist ideology has used “atheism” and “materialism” practically interchangeably. The latter term has connotations which put it into opposition to all “purpose of life” questions, which are usually associated with idealism (in Marxist terminology, idealism and materialism are two disjoint complementary types of worldview). Therefore, people who consider questions of “purpose of life” important aren’t comfortable with calling themselves atheists in former communist countries.
2) The word “atheist” is sometimes used as an insult in the US (rarely so in Czech republic, I have no idea about rest of Eastern Europe). The US atheists have adopted the term in order to signal their opposition to organised religion, however they have to compensate the associated negative feeling of being perceived as immoral, and they compensate it by frequent thinking about ethics, morality and purpose of life.
3) There were several intellectuals in the West who identified themselves as atheists and set the standard for atheist philosophy, where questions about purpose of life are meaningful. (Somebody who knows the writings of e.g. Bertrand Russell better than me should tell whether this isn’t sheer nonsense. I can’t think about any instance of famous self-proclaimed atheist writing about purpose of life.) On the contrary, Eastern Europe lacks any credible atheist intellectual tradition.
4) The word atheism has simply a sligthly different meaning on different sides of the Iron curtain. The difference has evolved rather randomly, without any specific cause.
Unfortunately I can provide no means of testing the above claims.
Well, as I said, that question is very hard to answer not only because it’s complex and involves many concepts that aren’t amenable to a no-nonsense scientific approach, but also because any sensible answer must include ideologically sensitive claims. History of ideas is a fascinating subject, but also an extraordinarily difficult one.
I don’t have anything like a complete and plausible theory that would answer your question, but one thing of which I am certain is that such a theory should start with re-examining the standard notion of “religion,” which I believe has outlived its usefulness in the modern world, and is nowadays creating more confusion than insight. But getting even just into that topic means opening enormous cans of worms.
It’s a very complex topic, but to put it as succinctly as possible, the key difference is between self-declared atheists who truly appear as such, and those who insist on their atheism, but various quasi-religious elements are nevertheless clearly discernible in their lives and worldviews (to the point where I would dispute whether it makes sense to exclude them from the general definition of “religion”).
Overall, my impression is that among the atheists found in North America, those of the latter kind are far more frequent and prominent compared to the post-Communist Eastern Europe, with Western Europe being somewhere in-between, but closer to North America. (Of course, these large geographical regions contain parts of greatly different religiosity, but what I write tends to be true for the local atheists found there regardless of their percentage in the local population.) Why this is so, and what exact quasi-religious elements are commonly seen among different sorts of self-declared non-religious people, are complex and fascinating questions, which are however difficult to discuss because they touch on many ideologically sensitive issues.
When I read people’s writings on all sorts of issues, I can usually discern the two types of atheists pretty quickly and reliably, and based on your comments I’ve read in this thread and elsewhere, you do seem to belong to the true sort like you declare. Assuming you’re writing from somewhere in Europe or the Anglosphere, as most people here are, this by itself places a significant probability on you being Eastern European, and more specifically from one of the less religious EE states, like Hungary, Czech Republic, or various former Soviet republics (as opposed to much more religious places like Poland or Croatia). Considering that your username is the word for “piglet” in several (but not all) Slavic languages, one of which is Czech, this seemed like a high-probability guess. Also, some additional evidence is that your English is excellent but still a little bit Slavic-souding, and your writing has a slight and vague quality typical of Central Europe that is very hard to explain. (By the way, if you’re curious, I’m Croatian.)
Voted up for the sheer awesome deduction tree. Almost Sherlock-holmes-ish, though some insider knowledge is involved.
This is probably in agreement with my anecdotal experience, but I haven’t realised it explicitly before. What I can think about at the moment is the webpage Daylight Atheism, whose author had spent a lot of time defending the concept of atheist spirituality (e.g. here), and there was usually surprisingly little opposition in the comments.
It means simply “pig” in Czech.
My original idea was that you were Russian, and after reading your previous comment, I have put a non-negligible probability to you being Czech too; hence, my nationality-predicting abilities are visibly inferior to yours.
Can you identify some specific instances of Slavic sounding structures in my writing? It could help me to eliminate them.
prase:
I don’t have in mind only such overt manifestations of quasi-religiosity, but also the way many people find beliefs and causes that technically don’t involve any supernatural elements, yet nevertheless become objects of mystical reverence in their lives, and are altogether impervious to any rational discussion. In many cases, I would argue that such beliefs effectively involve postulating the existence of metaphysical entities which, while not anthropomorphic, are no less imaginary than the deities postulated by various traditional religions. (One philosopher who made some original and radical inquiries along these lines was Max Stirner.) But this is a really difficult and controversial topic.
One thing that’s almost impossibly difficult for Slavic speakers is the use of articles, and you sometimes drop them in a quite Slavic-sounding way (I still do it occasionally too). However, these are just small and occasional things; your English is at a near-native level, and very well written overall. (Also, I should note that I probably notice this sort of thing more than a typical reader because I have a hobbyist interest in linguistics.)
Why do you think that is? Longer history of atheism?
I do think that “converts” (either to a religion or to atheism) think differently than people who were raised in their current belief system. If you’re childhood was religious, then you’ll associate religion with childhood and your parents, either negatively (“religion is childish”) or positively (“religion is comforting.”)
I suppose the history of atheism, measured by many reasonable criteria, is actually longer in North America than in Eastern Europe. Yes, the atheism was state sponsored for 40-50 years in Eastern European countries (70 years in the Soviet union), but it was often imposed on thoroughly religious societies. Practically all intellectual innovations were coming from the West.
Some possible (not experimentally tested and probably false) causes of the differences in atheists’ thinking:
1) The communist ideology has used “atheism” and “materialism” practically interchangeably. The latter term has connotations which put it into opposition to all “purpose of life” questions, which are usually associated with idealism (in Marxist terminology, idealism and materialism are two disjoint complementary types of worldview). Therefore, people who consider questions of “purpose of life” important aren’t comfortable with calling themselves atheists in former communist countries.
2) The word “atheist” is sometimes used as an insult in the US (rarely so in Czech republic, I have no idea about rest of Eastern Europe). The US atheists have adopted the term in order to signal their opposition to organised religion, however they have to compensate the associated negative feeling of being perceived as immoral, and they compensate it by frequent thinking about ethics, morality and purpose of life.
3) There were several intellectuals in the West who identified themselves as atheists and set the standard for atheist philosophy, where questions about purpose of life are meaningful. (Somebody who knows the writings of e.g. Bertrand Russell better than me should tell whether this isn’t sheer nonsense. I can’t think about any instance of famous self-proclaimed atheist writing about purpose of life.) On the contrary, Eastern Europe lacks any credible atheist intellectual tradition.
4) The word atheism has simply a sligthly different meaning on different sides of the Iron curtain. The difference has evolved rather randomly, without any specific cause.
Unfortunately I can provide no means of testing the above claims.
SarahC:
Well, as I said, that question is very hard to answer not only because it’s complex and involves many concepts that aren’t amenable to a no-nonsense scientific approach, but also because any sensible answer must include ideologically sensitive claims. History of ideas is a fascinating subject, but also an extraordinarily difficult one.
I don’t have anything like a complete and plausible theory that would answer your question, but one thing of which I am certain is that such a theory should start with re-examining the standard notion of “religion,” which I believe has outlived its usefulness in the modern world, and is nowadays creating more confusion than insight. But getting even just into that topic means opening enormous cans of worms.