What Can Atheists Learn From Religion?

Post Reply New Topic

Here's one man's perspective...

He goes on to say that Athiests are right to disbelieve religious dogma. But he says they make the mistake of rejecting the benefits religion brings. He claims that Religion offers consolation, ritual, spirituality that atheists can adopt; and that Religions have been the most successful educational movements.

I say that Religion is a crutch, and that the only real "success" that Religion has is the same as that of any other parasitic infestation - that is, Religion brings benefit only to the religious, and not to the rest of us, whether or not we believe in a Supreme Being.

First of all, I find the idea of a "fanatical atheist" completely laughable.
Nobody ever did anything IN THE NAME OF atheism. (I once saw a cartoon of a plane flying into the twin towers with someone yelling Dawkins is Great! Get it?)

It's impossible for an atheist to be consoled by religion, and the idea of maintaining fairy tales just so people can sleep better doesn't click with me.
I arrange christmas for my family, and we can eat good food, exchange presents and have a good time together without both Jesus and Santa Claus.

I fail to find many things to import into secular life. Crowd control? Obedience? Blind trust in questionable authority?
Some people miss weekly or daily rituals, I'm not one of them. Rituals for the most part just seem stupid to me.
"Spitiruality" is a very vague word. I get a very special feeling when I've struggled up the side of a mountain on skis and find myself on top. The feeling of both accomplishment and insignificance is very grand, and I like it a lot. I assume this is related to spirituality. The feeling you get when your children are born. No need to invoke something you don't think exists to feel elated.

I agree. Religion has benefits only to those who are religious, and that is me being nice, because I fail to see how consolation is worth anything when it's based on falsehood.

Sounds like he's suffering from a bit of cultural Stockholm syndrome. Sure, religion has some utility but why would I just look at one part of that equation? Beyond the negatives we know, we can't even guess at the opportunity cost of thousands of years of enforced superstition. Determining it's net value would be very difficult.

I have learned something important from religion. That people will believe anything if the right person promises them the right thing at the right time. They'll even cut their testicles off and poison themselves in the hopes of visiting an invisible space ship hiding behind a comet.

There's nothing that can be learned from religion that can't be learned from elsewhere. Every religion on Earth is outmoded.

I think that many religions offer something. Probably not Mormonism, Evango-Fascism, and Islam so much.

If you visit Europe, then it is obvious that Christianity stimulated quite a lot of art and architecture. In Asia, there are oodles of amazing Hindu and Buddhist temples to visit.

Some religions offer philosophic outlooks that are worthy of contemplating.

The Bible contains a lot of fascinating history, and has had a great impact on Western Civilization.

Religions may be "outmoded", but I am not one to feel terribly constrained by what is necessarily à la mode.

Alain de Botton, like Karen Armstrong, has transcended reality and now lives in an imaginary world where religious people don't actually have religious beliefs, but instead are doing some kind of exercise routine. Maybe he should go outside more often.

Its a rubber crutch at best

True consolation comes from utter self-reliance, not hoping your whispered prayers reach an invisible beard in space

I think there are some core values in terms of treating other people that can be learned from religion. It doesn't exactly have to be along the lines of treat people this way because something like the Bible tells you but because there are some worthwhile things that can be learned in the logic behind it and I guess I can see now where Alain de Botton is coming from perhaps. Other then that, I personally feel that it can be a way to just help people get through their lives which goes along the crutch logic that has been stated on here.

In a world where people died from horrible diseases and people killed each other for slightest reason. Like the roman society. One can understand the need to get:

But when a movement gets powerful enough. The power mongers show up:



State and religion is an interesting study subject. Also the practice of some priests to exploit children for sexual objectives and using the church to make the issue vanish.

Organized religion has caused many people to suffer throughout the history. I'm more inclined to think of it as something that NT-style of mind needs to make their own societies work. If people believe that someone are watching them all the time and the ones that don't believe are ostracized, then random acts of violence can be reduced. Effective societal control by indirect means.

Education has been with the agenda to learn religion. And then people used the same means to learn about other things. A tool invented to control ended up enabling other "unintended consequences".

Religion is a crutch that is used by crippled people to beat other people with and make them into cripples so that they too can wield their own crutches like cudgels ... and the cycle goes on ... and on ... and on ...

Or, as a master wordsmith once wrote:

Cripple fight!! !! !! !!!11one

One could make the argument that atheism is a crutch as well. Diehard atheists believe in their cause, and yes I use the word "believe" intentionally. I don't consider that a crutch though, but the fact that atheists find strength in their atheism is perhaps something to think about.

I mean, what is so bad about a crutch?

I am deliberately playing devil's advocate. I just don't think the idea that religion is a crutch is a very good argument for atheists.

Buddhism is a religion that I see a lot of good in - more good than bad. Christianity I see good points is a well - but sometimes I wonder if the bad outweighs the good.

But really I have known people who have said they have turned their life around by finding God. Is it really my right to tear them down by saying that God is just a crutch? I use crutches all the time. So do all atheists. A crutch is just not a valid argument.

I find people who say they have found happiness through god profoundly and inanely baffling. How can someone claim to find something so profound as happiness in something so imaginary as religion. To me it's like saying I've found happiness by flicking through a self help book published by someone who thinks they can document and sell happiness. But just because this is how I feel doesn't take anything away from someone who claims they have found happiness through god. I find it utterly perplexing but if they are happy then who am I to judge, if anything I am envious of their new found joy, to find such a thing in something so abstract is a skill I do not possess.
Religion is a way of life people choose to follow either because they ardently/blindly believe in it or because they feel incapable/unable to go through life using a set of moral codes they have devised themselves, in the case of the latter I see religion as a crutch. But is the use of a crutch a bad thing?

I don't know if I could stand to learn anything from religion, not because I am a stubborn atheist but because I wish to go through life based on my own morals and ethics that I have worked hard to put in to place. I am a good person and I do not feel like I need to follow someone else's established set of 'life rules' in order to prove that. However I will not judge other people who feel they cannot adhere to their own set of scruples and need to follow those set out by the bible. Come to think of it though, there is your crutch.

I didn't read the article necessarily but from the blurb and your summary it sounds like he's saying something pretty close to what I've been saying for a few years. There may be no God, no holy ghost, no human soul, but even without God we do need support structures in society, we do need ritual, but just as importantly we need to be about something at some organized level and have certain standards - regardless of what the wildly libertarian (some would argue libertine/licentious) among us have to say on that one. My answer to their criticism - we should have our corners to do what we want but, the public sphere still should be dominated by organized standards. The alternative to standards and a society that knows what its about is yes, a society with wild freedoms but where each individual is essentially spinning in their own private void and where - ultimately via loneliness - their own minds are sort of cannibalizing themselves.

With public standards, yes, you make a few people feel bad about themselves. Then again that's not necessarily a bad thing either all the time - as in often enough people *should* feel bad about themselves or bad about things they've done, if they're told not to they won't, and what happens then is it just gets bumped down the line and displaced like bullying onto essentially some of the best and kindest people around - often they get stuck eating it specifically because they're good people and will take crap. The other thing - rights without responsibilities, we've done a great job as a society of claiming what we have rights to but talk about 'responsibilities' in this day and age and the present political climate has been third-rail material.

My take on religion though these days - ESPECIALLY with as many church-going atheists as we seem to have in this forum (including the OP) its no small source of irony. I think the religious largely are church going for the same reason WP atheists are church going. You have thousands of years of social engineering embodied in something that's kept life on the conveyor belt going forward for people, its given them the connections they needed as well as the ability to find work, find husbands/wives, have close-nit and trusted community; outside of that we have meager little for substitute and if things keep going at the rate they are it'll go from only the people in organized religion having these things to no one having them at all. That last part would be the real tragedy it would clearly denote that we never learned our lesson.

Atheism is as much of a crutch as not collecting stamps is a hobby.


1. The crutch of religion identifies you as an intellectual cripple.
2. Crutches can be used as weapons.
3. Crutches are often used by scam artists to solicit money from gullible strangers.


Once you give up religion - once you've thrown away the crutch - you will be amazed at how well you can stand on your own, and how much you can accomplish without the inconvenience of having to rely on a crutch.


The best thing about religion is that it keeps religious people off the streets for a few hours every week.


Do not equate God with religion, as they are not the same thing. Conflating the two invalidates your argument.

Besides, what crutch do "all" Atheists use? Education? Facts? Reality? These are not crutches. The first two are tools, while reality is what's left when you stop believing in unprovable things.

I don't think you've been to a Catholic church as many times as I was growing up. If you ever do go please watch how people act, both inside and outside of church, and let me know how seriously they're taking eternal judgment.