What kind of atheist are you? | Clay Routledge

This interview is an episode from The Well, our new publication about ideas that inspire a life well-lived, created with the John Templeton Foundation.

Atheism is typically thought of as being binary: You either believe in God or you don’t.

In reality, atheism is a much more complex belief system. Some atheists are spiritual, while others are “angry” at the divine — both of which imply some level of belief in something.

Many atheists engage in teleological thinking, which is the notion that there is a hidden design or meaning to our lives.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Clay Routledge:
Dr. Clay Routledge is a leading expert in existential psychology. His work examines how the human need for meaning in life influences and is influenced by different cognitive processes, self-regulation, momentous life experiences, personal and professional goals, creativity, social connections, spirituality and religiosity, entrepreneurship, and prosocial behavior.

Dr. Routledge has published over 100 scholarly papers, co-edited three books on existential psychology, and authored the books Nostalgia: A Psychological Resource and Supernatural: Death, Meaning, and the Power of the Invisible World.

His work has been featured by many media outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, CBS News, ABC News, BBC News, CBC News, CNN, NBC Today, MSNBC, Men’s Health, The Atlantic, and The New Yorker. As a social commentator, Dr. Routledge has authored articles for a number of outlets including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, USA Today, Scientific American, National Review, Entrepreneur, and Harvard Business Review. He was the lead writer for the TED-Ed animated lesson Why Do We Feel Nostalgia?

Dr. Clay Routledge is the Vice President of Research and the Director of the Human Flourishing Lab at the Archbridge Institute. He is also an editor at Profectus, a periodic web-based magazine focused on civilizational progress and human flourishing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more from The Well:
Are you a spectator to reality? Or are you its creator?
Can mathematics be spiritual? Ask Einstein
Why Einstein is a “peerless genius” and Hawking is an “ordinary genius”

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About The Well
Do we inhabit a multiverse? Do we have free will? What is love? Is evolution directional? There are no simple answers to life’s biggest questions, and that’s why they’re the questions occupying the world’s brightest minds.

So what do they think?

How is the power of science advancing understanding? How are philosophers and theologians tackling these fascinating questions?

Let’s dive into The Well.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Join The Well on your favorite platforms:

[bigthink]

Do you think that atheists can believe in the supernatural, or is it contradictory?

[UnionJack]

The test is flawed...
As an atheist, I wouldn't feel comfortable saying I wished Darth Vader would hurt my loved ones... not because I think it's a possibility, but because the concept itself is a negative thought experiment without merit. The wishing of harm to those I love has nothing to do with the catalyst, but the idea itself.
Atheist simply means rejection of a belief in a god or gods, nothing more...
To add levels is to add confusion.

[IRosamelia]

As an atheist, I feel uncomfortable saying "I wish God will harm my loved ones" for the same reason I feel uncomfortable saying "I wish my loved ones were harmed". It has nothing to do with supernatural belief, just about the idea of loved ones getting harmed.

[tanitoluwaj.adedotun]

First video I'll see from BT where most of the ideas don't add up.

It could not have been helped however; when he started off by trying to fragment the word "Atheist" (which essentially means someone who totally lacks belief in deity) into total, partial and abstract belief, he already took a wrong turn.

[BenCrawford]

This sounds like a theist trying to rationalize wayward atheists.

[scribbler]

Seems to me that Mr Routledge is making this more complicated than it actually is.

The word "atheist" itself is explanation enough.

For instance, if someone is apolitical, it means they have no political affiliation.

If an object is asymmetrical, it means the object has no symmetry.

If a person is asymptomatic, it means they have no symptoms.

And if someone is an atheist, it means that they are not a theist.

It's really no more complicated than that.

[caseyczarnomski]

The purpose of this video funded by Big Think: "Sir John M. Templeton, a billionaire investor and philanthropist who poured hundreds of millions of dollars into efforts to reconcile science and religion, died of pneumonia yesterday in the Bahamas. He was 95." (Scientific American, July 9th 2008)

The purpose this foundation exists is to incorporate Religion into Science. Approach everything they do skeptically.

[GHP]

As an atheist of the more hardcore kind, I think an easier explanation for many atheists use of teleological language than "they might unconsciously be believing after all" is that teleological language and idioms have been built into the English language for a long time such that it is actually quite hard to describe certain events and concepts *without* using teleological language, even if you don't believe in teleological concepts.

I don't believe there to be a creator of any kind, but that doesn't mean I'm beyond the concept that I could be wrong. Testing that hypothesis on other people's lives, especially those I value, would naturally make me uncomfortable.

[hmgrraarrpffrzz]

Lot's of things said in this video makes no sense.

If a person say that they mean with atheism that they are not member of a religion, then they haven't understood atheism, because there are atheistic religions after all.

"Emotional atheist" makes no sense. All atheists have emotions. What you probably mean are anti-theists: people who'd like to get rid of theism. And to have emotions towards something means to consider it to be true? Now that is one stupid argument. According to that logic, people who like Harry Potter believe that he exists. Or people who get angry at Darth Vader when watching Star Wars, or any other villain, believe that he exists too. It just makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, atheists who are angry are not usually angry at any deity or deities, but rather the harm that is done by the people who hold those believes.

Also, people who believe in the existence of deities, regardless of whether they share their believes in public or not, are not atheists.

In the end, all atheism says is that you are not convinced that deities exist. And personally I like the definition with the three subgroups the most: explicit positive atheism, explicit negative atheism, and implicit atheism.

Then again, that this video comes from an organization that promotes religion is not surprising...

Thumbs down because of all the mistakes in the video. Well, mistakes if he didn't really know what he was talking about. If he knew what he was talking about, those were just lies.

[thebowandbullet]

Most atheists are raised in an environment where most people have some sort of religious belief/belief in the supernatural, so that ends up in the language people use regardless of whether atheists ascribe any actual, serious meaning or belief to it. For example, an atheist can exclaim "Oh my God!" without believing in God. It's just a common expression, in the same way many celebrate xmas without believing in God.

[bradley]

Don't like your take on "Emotional Atheism" as it's described in this video. I don't think people who are angry at religion are sub-consciously acknowledging that the spiritual side of a particular religion exists. Rather, they'd be angry at the people who preach the teachings of something that they believe doesn't have any sort of logical evidence for it's existence. Seeing as the most radical of these people following the religion will use it as an excuse to commit atrocities. Or even on a smaller scale, as an excuse to exude control over others.

Therefore, they don't acknowledge that there's any sort of precedent that the spiritual side of a religion is real, but the people whom were involved in it's inception, and it's longevity, are very real, and are a very reasonable thing to be angry at.

[lindseypeterson]

The comments make waaaay more sense than this video's attempt.

[MattZildjian]

this seems like a huge misrepresentation of atheism. and yes it really is that simple. A-Theist = without theism.

[silvioi]

As an atheist, I would have a reaction if someone says me that my loved ones will be hurt by god. But we have yo distinguish wether the reaction is due to the person responsible (god in this case) or if it’s due to the image of our loved ones getting hurt non matter who hurts them

[PLF...]

You cant just hijack "purpose" as a religious term. You can create your own purposes just fine. One of the most inherent human instincts is finding patterns - which is what has made us who we are. Curiosity and trying to make predictions of the future. Neither of these are religiously based and shouldn't be treated as such. Regardless of who says it.

[steven]

i wonder if a single atheist actually worked on this video...

[etxebarrieta]

It is funny because all the atheist categories that Clay is discussing as well as his entire speech throughout the video is somehow assuming that all atheists believe in something, whatever and however that might be, which as I see it, those would not be atheist per se.

[CaptnOgre]

Sorry but you're analysis is exactly one of the reasons for the "confusion" regarding what is an atheist. It just simply means I don't believe because there's not sufficient evidence to do so. All the other "types" of atheists you mentioned are just how those ppl express their non-belief or how far they take it.
This video just made the "believers" more confused and surely less likely to be open minded to discussions with us.
Thanks 🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️ 🤬

[scylericaa]

Do you think that the negative reaction they had might have been towards the idea of wishing harm to the people close to them and not the idea of something supernatural causing the harm?

[DANEoo]

Fun fact: the guy represents the John Templeton Foundation, which was one of the largest funders of the climate-denial movement between 2003 and 2010.