this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
488 points (96.0% liked)

Greentext

8453 readers
856 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works
488
Anon ruins christmas (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 2 days ago by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works
190 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 143 points 2 days ago (110 children)

Sounds like Atheism, like all belief systems, empowered an asshole with self-righteous validation. Even if you bet on the right horse, it doesn't mean everything you do is automatically justified; empathy is a higher order law.

[–] superduperpirate@lemmy.world 45 points 2 days ago

empathy is a higher order law.

Anon forgot that having an asshole doesn’t mean you should regularly act like one.

[–] GandalftheBlack@feddit.org 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Atheism isn't really a belief system by itself. It can refer to a lot of things, including positive atheism (the claim that there is not/cannot be a god/supernatural entity), negative atheism (the lack of belief in a deity due to lack of evidence), the absence of religion and many other things. Militant atheism, on the other hand, definitely counts and is susceptible to all the failings you mentioned.

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's not called militant atheism, you're describing anti-theism. I've never heard of atheism claiming definitively that there are no deities or higher powers either, just that since there's no evidence the claims aren't worth consideration and can be dismissed as nonsense.

[–] mrbutterscotch@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago

I believe what you are describing is Agnosticism, which questions the existence of God but doesn't claim there isn't one either.

Atheism afaik does claim that something like a God can't/doesn't exist (or Anti-theism).

[–] Eyekaytee@aussie.zone 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I’ve never heard of atheism claiming definitively that there are no deities or higher powers either

Maybe this will help?

This definition is also found in multiple encyclopedias and dictionaries of philosophy. For example, in the Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, William L. Rowe (also an atheist) writes, “Atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. It proposes positive disbelief rather than mere suspension of belief” (2000: 62). The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy recognizes multiple senses of the word “atheism”, but is clear about which is standard in philosophy:

[Atheism is] the view that there are no gods. A widely used sense denotes merely not believing in god and is consistent with agnosticism [in the psychological sense]. A stricter sense denotes a belief that there is no god; this use has become standard. (Pojman 2015, emphasis added)

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/

Maybe you will understand the picture I posted in the other comment as well now?

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's not surprising that academic theological philosophy uses atheism as a strict position that there are no gods, inferring the claim, but even your source states the widely accepted definition is simply the lack of belief in a god or gods before choosing the previous definition for the purposes of the paper. Academic usage that acknowledges they're not using the widely accepted usage isn't super relevant unless you're having academic discussions with academics in academic contexts. I understood the picture fine, it's just wrong.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (108 replies)