ويکيپېډيا

د "اتيزم" د بڼو تر مېنځ توپير

ياداښت ولټوي
→ تېر توپيربل توپير ←
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
و r2.7.1) (روباټ زیاتول: als:Atheismus
W.Kaleem (خبرې اترې | ونډې)
۷٬۷۹۰ edits
د سمون لنډیز نسته
۱ کرښه:
{{صاف}}
'''اتيزم''' د انګرېزۍ (atheism) يا زموږ په ژبه الحاد ته وايي. الحاد په څښتن ګروهه نه لرل، او لادينيت ته وايي.
 
Line ۱۹ ⟶ ۲۰:
روماني دهریت په اخلاقي بنسټونو د څښتن پر خلاف د یوه راډیکل احتجاج په توګه په ۱۹مه پېړۍ کې منځته راغله. له څښتن څخه شکایاتو نه ددوي
 
== لا ادریت (Agnosticism) ==
{{ژباړل}}
{{semiprotected|small=yes}}
{{featured article}}
{{redirect|Atheist|the death metal band|Atheist (band)}}
<!--
Before changing this definition, please consider the following:
Talk:Atheism/Archive_27#A_survey_of_definitions_for_atheism
Talk:Atheism/Archive_29#List_of_definitions
-->
{{atheism2}}
'''Atheism''', as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the [[Existence of God#Arguments for the non-existence of God|nonexistence]] of [[Deity|gods]]<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |first=William L. |last=Rowe |authorlink=William L. Rowe |encyclopedia=[[Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |title=Atheism |year=1998 |editor=Edward Craig |quote=Atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. It proposes positive disbelief rather than mere suspension of belief.}}</ref> or rejects [[theism]].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |first=Kai |last=Nielsen |authorlink=Kai Nielsen |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |title=Atheism |url=http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9109479/atheism |accessdate=2007-04-28}} "...a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for [reasons that depend] on how God is being conceived."</ref> When defined more broadly, atheism is the absence of belief in [[Deity|deities]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Eller|first=David |year=2004|title=Natural Atheism|pages=p. 12}}</ref> alternatively called [[nontheism|''nontheism'']].<ref>[[religioustolerance.org]]'s short article on [http://www.religioustolerance.org/atheist4.htm Definitions of the term "Atheism"] suggests that there is no consensus on the definition of the term. [[Simon Blackburn]] summarizes the situation in [[The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy]]: "Atheism. Either the lack of belief in a god, or the belief that there is none." Most dictionaries (see the [[OneLook]] query for [http://www.onelook.com/?w=atheism&ls=a "atheism"]) first list one of the more narrow definitions.</ref> Although atheism is often equated with [[irreligion]], some [[religion|religious philosophies]], such as [[secular theology]] and some varieties of [[Buddhism]] such as [[Theravada]], either do not include belief in a [[personal god]] as a tenet of the religion, or actively teach nontheism.
 
Many [[self-identity|self-described]] [[list of atheists|atheists]] are [[Skepticism|skeptical]] of all [[supernatural]] beings and cite a lack of [[empiricism|empirical]] evidence for the existence of deities. Others argue for atheism on philosophical, social or historical grounds. Although many self-described atheists tend toward [[secularism|secular]] philosophies such as [[humanism]]<ref>Honderich, Ted (Ed.) (1995). "Humanism". ''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy''. Oxford University Press. p 376. ISBN 0-19-866132-0.</ref> and [[naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]],<ref>Fales, Evan. "Naturalism and Physicalism", in {{harvnb|Martin|2007|pp=122–131}}.</ref> there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|pp=3–4}}.</ref>
 
The term ''atheism'' originated as a [[pejorative]] [[epithet]] applied to any person or belief in conflict with established religion.<ref name=drachmann>{{cite book | last = Drachmann | first = A. B. | title = Atheism in Pagan Antiquity | publisher = Chicago: Ares Publishers | year = 1977 ("an unchanged reprint of the 1922 edition") | id = ISBN 0-89005-201-8 | quote = Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said ''{{transl|grc|atheos}}'' and ''{{transl|grc|atheotēs}}''; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, ''{{transl|grc|atheos}}'' was used as an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it employed to denote a certain philosophical creed. }}</ref> With the spread of [[freethought]], [[scientific skepticism]], and [[criticism of religion]], the term began to gather a more specific meaning and has been increasingly used as a self-description by atheists.
 
== Etymology ==
[[دوتنه:Ephesians 2,12 - Greek atheos.jpg|thumb|left|250px|The Greek word {{lang|grc|αθεοι}} (''atheoi''), as it appears in the [[Epistle to the Ephesians]] ({{bibleverse-nb||Ephesians|2:12}}) on the early 3rd-century [[Papyrus 46]]. It is usually translated into English as "[those who are] without God".<ref>The word {{lang|grc|αθεοι}}—in any of its forms—appears nowhere else in the [[Septuagint]] or the [[New Testament]]. {{cite book |last=Robertson |first=A.T. |title=Word Pictures in the New Testament |origyear=1932 |accessdate=2007-04-12 |date=1960 |publisher=Broadman Press |chapter=Ephesians: Chapter 2 |chapterurl=http://www.ccel.org/r/robertson_at/wordpictures/htm/EPH2.RWP.html |quote=Old Greek word, not in LXX, only here in N.T. Atheists in the original sense of being without God and also in the sense of hostility to God from failure to worship him. See Paul's words in Ro 1:18–32.}}</ref>]]
 
In early [[Ancient Greek]], the adjective ''{{transl|grc|atheos}}'' ({{lang|grc|[[:wikt:ἄθεος|ἄθεος]]}}, from the [[privative a|privative {{lang|grc|ἀ}}-]] + {{lang|grc|[[:wikt:θεός|θεός]]}} "god") meant "godless". The word began to indicate more-intentional, active godlessness in the 5th century [[Common Era|BCE]], acquiring definitions of "severing relations with the gods" or "denying the gods, ungodly" instead of the earlier meaning of [[:wikt:ἀσεβής|ἀσεβής]] (''{{transl|grc|asebēs}}'') or "impious". Modern translations of classical texts sometimes render ''{{transl|grc|atheos}}'' as "atheistic". As an abstract noun, there was also {{lang|grc|[[:wikt:ἀθεότης|ἀθεότης]]}} (''{{transl|grc|atheotēs}}''), "atheism". [[Cicero]] transliterated the Greek word into the [[Latin]] ''{{lang|la|[[:wikt:atheos#Latin|atheos]]}}''. The term found frequent use in the debate between [[early Christianity|early Christians]] and pagans, with each side attributing it, in the pejorative sense, to the other.<ref name=drachmann/>
 
In [[English language|English]], the term ''atheism'' was derived from the [[French language|French]] ''{{lang|fr|[[wikt:athéisme|athéisme]]}}'' in about 1587.<ref>Rendered as ''Athisme'': {{cite book | last = Golding | first = Arthur | coauthors = [[Philip Sidney]] | authorlink = Arthur Golding | title = [[Philippe de Mornay|Mornay's]] Woorke concerning the Trewnesse of the Christian Religion, written in French; Against Atheists, Epicures, Paynims, Iewes, Mahumetists, and other infidels | publisher = London | year = 1587 |pages= xx. 310 |quote= Athisme, that is to say, vtter godlesnes. }} Translation of ''De la verite de la religion chrestienne'' (1581). </ref> The term ''atheist'' (from Fr. ''{{lang|fr|[[wikt:athée|athée]]}}''), in the sense of "one who denies or disbelieves the existence of God",<ref>{{OED|[http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50014052 atheist]}}</ref> predates ''atheism'' in English, being first attested in about 1571.<ref>Rendered as ''Atheistes'': {{cite book | last = Golding | first = Arthur | authorlink = Arthur Golding | title = The Psalmes of David and others, with [[John Calvin|J. Calvin]]'s commentaries | year = 1571 |pages= Ep. Ded. 3 |quote= The Atheistes which say..there is no God. }} Translated from French.</ref> ''Atheist'' as a label of practical godlessness was used at least as early as 1577.<ref>{{cite book | last = Hanmer | first = Meredith | title = The auncient ecclesiasticall histories of the first six hundred years after Christ, written by Eusebius, Socrates, and Evagrius | publisher = London | year = 1577 |pages= 63 |oclc= 55193813 |quote= The opinion which they conceaue of you, to be Atheists, or godlesse men. }}</ref> Related words emerged later: ''deist'' in 1621,<ref>{{cite book | last = Burton | first = Robert | authorlink = Robert Burton (scholar) |title = [[The Anatomy of Melancholy]] | year = 1621 |pages= III. iv. II. i |quote= Cosen-germans to these men are many of our great Philosophers and Deists. }}</ref> ''theist'' in 1662;<ref>{{cite book | last = Martin | first = Edward | authorlink = |title = His opinion concerning the difference between the Church of England and Geneva [etc.] |publisher = London | year = 1662 |chapter = Five Letters |pages= 45 |quote= To have said my office..twice a day..among Rebels, Theists, Atheists, Philologers, Wits, Masters of Reason, Puritanes [etc.]. }}</ref> ''[[theism]]'' in 1678;<ref>{{cite book | last = Cudworth | first = Ralph | authorlink = Ralph Cudworth |title = The true intellectual system of the universe |publisher = London | year = 1678 |pages= Preface |quote= Nor indeed out of a meer Partiall Regard to that Cause of Theism neither, which we were engaged in. }}</ref> and ''[[deism]]'' in 1682.<ref>{{cite book | last = Dryden | first = John | authorlink = John Dryden |title = Religio laici, or A laymans faith, a poem |publisher = London | year = 1682 |oclc = 11081103 |pages= Preface |quote=…namely, that Deism, or the principles of natural worship, are only the faint remnants or dying flames of revealed religion in the posterity of Noah… }}</ref> ''Deism'' and ''theism'' changed meanings slightly around 1700, due to the influence of ''atheism''; ''deism'' was originally used as a synonym for today's ''theism'', but came to denote a separate philosophical doctrine.<ref>The ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' also records an earlier, irregular formation, ''atheonism'', dated from about 1534. The later and now obsolete words ''athean'' and ''atheal'' are dated to 1611 and 1612 respectively. {{cite book | title = [[Oxford English Dictionary|The Oxford English Dictionary]] | edition = Second Edition | year = 1989 | publisher = Oxford University Press, USA | id = ISBN 0-19-861186-2}}</ref>
 
[[Karen Armstrong]] writes that "During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the word 'atheist' was still reserved exclusively for [[polemic]] ... The term 'atheist' was an insult. Nobody would have dreamed of calling ''himself'' an atheist."<ref>{{cite book | last = Armstrong | first = Karen | authorlink = Karen Armstrong | title = A History of God | year = 1999 | publisher = London: Vintage | id = ISBN 0-09-927367-5}}</ref> ''Atheism'' was first used to describe a self-avowed belief in late 18th-century Europe, specifically denoting disbelief in the [[monotheism|monotheistic]] [[Judeo-Christian]] [[deity|god]].<ref name="adevism">In part because of its wide use in monotheistic Western society, ''atheism'' is usually described as "disbelief in God", rather than more generally as "disbelief in deities". A clear distinction is rarely drawn in modern writings between these two definitions, but some archaic uses of ''atheism'' encompassed only disbelief in the singular God, not in [[polytheism|polytheistic]] deities. It is on this basis that the obsolete term ''[[adevism]]'' was coined in the late 19th century to describe an absence of belief in plural deities. {{cite journal | author = Britannica | title = Atheonism | journal = [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | edition = 11th Edition | year = 1911}}</ref> In the 20th century, [[globalization]] contributed to the expansion of the term to refer to disbelief in all deities, though it remains common in Western society to describe atheism as simply "disbelief in God"<ref name="martin">Martin, Michael. ''[http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0521842700 The Cambridge Companion to Atheism]''. Cambridge University Press. 2006. ISBN 0-521-84270-0.</ref>. Most recently, there has been a push in certain philosophical circles to redefine ''atheism'' negatively, as the "absence of belief in deities", rather than as a belief in its own right; this definition has become popular in atheist communities, though its mainstream usage has been limited.<ref name="martin"/><ref>{{cite web | last = Cline | first = Austin | title = What Is the Definition of Atheism? | url = http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/definition.htm | accessdate = 2006-10-21 | year
= 2006 | publisher = [[about.com]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book | last = Flew | first = Antony | authorlink = Antony Flew | title = God, Freedom, and Immortality: A Critical Analysis | publisher = Buffalo, NY: Prometheus | year = 1984 | id = ISBN 0-87975-127-4}}</ref>
 
== Definitions and distinctions ==
[[دوتنه:AtheismImplicitExplicit3.svg|thumb|right|230px|A chart showing the relationship between the definitions of weak/strong and implicit/explicit atheism. An implicit atheist has not thought about belief in gods; such an individual would be described as implicitly without a belief in gods. An explicit atheist has made an assertion regarding belief in gods; such an individual may eschew belief in gods (weak atheism), or affirm that gods do not exist (strong atheism).]]
Writers have disagreed on how best to define and classify ''atheism'',<ref name="eb911-atheism">{{cite web | date = 1911 | url = http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Atheism | title = "Atheism" | work = Encyclopedia Britannica | accessdate = 2007-06-07}}</ref> contesting what supernatural entities it applies to, whether it is an assertion in its own right or merely the absence of one, and whether it requires a conscious, explicit rejection. A variety of categories have been proposed to try to distinguish the different forms of atheism, most of which treat atheism as "absence of belief in deities" in order to explore the varieties of this nontheism.
 
=== Range ===
Some of the ambiguity and controversy involved in defining ''atheism'' arises from difficulty in reaching a consensus for the definitions of words like ''deity'' and ''god''. The plurality of wildly different [[conceptions of god]] and deities leads to differing ideas regarding atheism's applicability. In contexts where ''[[theism]]'' is defined as the belief in a [[monotheism|singular]] [[personal god]], for example, people who believe in a variety of other deities may be classified as atheists, including [[deism|deists]] and even [[polytheism|polytheists]]. In the 20th century, this view has fallen into disfavor as ''theism'' has come to be understood as encompassing belief in any divinity.<ref name="mmartin">Martin, Michael. ''[http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0521842700 The Cambridge Companion to Atheism]''. Cambridge University
Press. 2006. ISBN 0-521-84270-0.</ref>
 
With respect to the range of phenomena being rejected, atheism may counter anything from the existence of a god, to the existence of any spiritual, [[supernatural]], or [[Transcendence (religion)|transcendental]] concepts, such as those of Hinduism and Buddhism.<ref name="Britannica1992">{{cite journal | author = Britannica | title = Atheism as rejection of religious beliefs | url = http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-38265/atheism | accessdate = 2006-10-27 | journal = [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | edition = 15th Edition | volume = 1 | pages = 666 | year = 1992 | id = 0852294735}}</ref>
 
=== Implicit vs. explicit ===
{{main|Implicit and explicit atheism}}
Definitions of atheism also vary in the degree of consideration a person must put to the idea of gods to be considered an atheist. Minimally, atheism may be seen as the absence of belief in one or more gods. It has been contended that this broad definition includes newborns and other people who have not been exposed to theistic ideas. As far back as 1772, [[d'Holbach]] said that "All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God".<ref>{{cite book | last = d'Holbach | first = P. H. T. | authorlink = Baron d'Holbach | title = Good Sense | url = http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/7319 | accessdate = 2006-10-27 | year = 1772}}</ref> Similarly, [[George H. Smith]] (1979) suggested that: "The man who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe in a god. This category would also include the child with the conceptual capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an atheist."<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1979|p=14}}.</ref> Smith coined the term ''implicit atheism'' to refer to "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it" and ''explicit atheism'' to refer to the more common definition of conscious disbelief.
 
The view that children are born atheist is relatively recent. Prior to the 18th century, the existence of God was so universally accepted in the western world that even the possibility of true atheism was questioned. This is called ''theistic [[innatism]]''—the notion that all people believe in God from birth; within this view was the connotation that atheists are simply in denial.<ref>{{cite book | last = Cudworth | first = Ralph | authorlink = Ralph Cudworth | title = The True Intellectual System of the Universe: the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted and its impossibility demonstrated | year = 1678}}</ref> It is also asserted that atheists are quick to believe in God in times of crisis—that atheists make [[deathbed conversion]]s, or that "there are no [[atheists in foxholes]]." Atheists dispute this claim by citing examples of "atheists in foxholes";<ref>{{cite web | last=Lowder | first=Jeffery Jay | year=1997 | title=Atheism and Society | url=http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/society.html | accessdate=2007-01-10 }}</ref> also, atheist organizations of military personnel have been created in response.<ref>Two such organizations are [http://www.atheistfoxholes.org/ Atheists in Foxholes] and the [[Military Association of Atheists & Freethinkers]].</ref>
 
=== Strong vs. weak ===
{{main|Weak and strong atheism}}
Philosophers such as [[Antony Flew]]<ref name="presumption">Flew, Antony. "The Presumption of Atheism". ''The Presumption of Atheism and other Philosophical Essays on God, Freedom, and Immortality''. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1976. pp 14ff.</ref> and [[Michael Martin (philosopher)|Michael Martin]]<ref name="martin"/> have contrasted strong (positive) atheism with weak (negative) atheism. Strong atheism is the explicit affirmation that gods do not exist. Weak atheism includes all other forms of non-theism. According to this categorization, anyone who is not a theist is either a weak or a strong atheist.<ref>{{cite web | last = Cline | first = Austin | title = Strong Atheism vs. Weak Atheism: What's the Difference? | url = http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/strong_weak.htm | accessdate = 2006-10-21 | year = 2006 | publisher = [[about.com]]}}</ref> The terms ''weak'' and ''strong'' are relatively recent; however, the equivalent terms ''negative'' and ''positive'' atheism have been used in the philosophical literature<ref name="presumption"/> and (in a slightly different sense) in Catholic apologetics.<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/jm3303.htm |title=On the Meaning of Contemporary Atheism |journal=The Review of Politics |first=Jacques |last=Maritain |year=1949 |month=July |volume=11 |issue=3 |pages=267–280}}</ref> Under this demarcation of atheism, most [[agnosticism|agnostics]] qualify as weak atheists.
 
While agnosticism can be seen as a form of weak atheism,<ref>{{cite journal |first=Anthony |last=Kenny |authorlink=Anthony Kenny |year=2006 |title=Worshipping an Unknown God |url=http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-9329.2006.00339.x |journal=Ratio |volume=19 |issue=4 |pages=442 |quote=Those who fail to believe in God because they think that the truth-value of ‘God exists’ is uncertain may be called agnostic negative atheists, or agnostics for short.}}</ref> most agnostics see their view as distinct from atheism, which they may consider no more justified than theism, or requires an equal conviction.<ref>{{cite book |first=Anthony |last=Kenny |authorlink=Anthony Kenny |title=What I believe |chapter=Why I Am Not an Atheist |publisher=Continuum |id=ISBN 0-8264-8971-0 |quote=The true default position is neither theism nor atheism, but agnosticism … a claim to knowledge needs to be substantiated; ignorance need only be confessed.}}</ref> The supposed unattainability of knowledge for or against the existence of gods is sometimes seen as indication that atheism requires a [[leap of faith]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Atheists take bigger leap of faith than ‘believers’ |first=Ken |last=Freking |url=http://www.columbiatribune.com/2005/Jan/20050123Comm008.asp |accessdate=2007-05-30 |date=[[2005-01-23]] |work=Columbia Daily Tribune}}</ref> Common atheist responses to this argument include that unproven ''[[faith#religious faith|religious]]'' propositions deserve as much disbelief as all ''other'' unproven propositions,<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|pp=30–34}}. "Who seriously claims we should say 'I neither believe nor disbelieve that the Pope is a robot', or 'As to whether or not eating this piece of chocolate will turn me into an elephant I am completely agnostic'. In the absence of any good reasons to believe these outlandish claims, we rightly disbelieve them, we don't just suspend judgement."</ref> and that the unprovability of a god's existence does not imply equal probability of either possibility.<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|p=22}}. "A lack of proof is no grounds for the suspension of belief. This is because when we have a lack of absolute proof we can still have overwhelming evidence or one explanation which is far superior to the alternatives."</ref> Scottish philosopher [[J. J. C. Smart]] even argues that "sometimes a person who is really an atheist may describe herself, even passionately, as an agnostic because of unreasonable generalised [[philosophical scepticism]] which would preclude us from saying that we know anything whatever, except perhaps the truths of mathematics and formal logic."<ref name="stanford">{{cite web |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/ |title=Atheism and Agnosticism |first=J.C.C. |last=Smart |date=2004-03-09 |publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |accessdate=2007-04-12}}</ref> Consequently, some popular atheist authors such as [[Richard Dawkins]] prefer distinguishing theist, agnostic and atheist positions by the [[Spectrum of theistic probability|probability]] assigned to the statement "God exists".<ref>{{Cite book |first=Richard |last=Dawkins |authorlink=Richard Dawkins |title=The God Delusion |id=ISBN 0-618-68000-4 |publisher=Bantam Books |year=2006 |pages=p. 50}}</ref>
 
== Rationale ==
[[دوتنه:Supreme Impiety, Atheist and Charlatan - Picta poesis, by Barthélemy Aneau (1552).jpg|300px|thumb|right|<small>"A child of the mob once asked an astronomer who the father was who brought him into this world. The scholar pointed to the sky, and to an old man sitting, and said: 'That one there is your body's father, and that your soul's.' To which the boy replied: 'WHAT IS ABOVE US IS OF NO CONCERN TO US, and I'm ashamed to be the child of such an aged man!' O WHAT SUPREME impiety, not to want to recognize your father, and not to think God is your maker!"</small><ref>Translation of Latin text from "[http://www.emblems.arts.gla.ac.uk/french/emblem.php?id=FANa100 Summa impietas]" (1552), ''Picta poesis'', by [[Barthélemy Aneau]]. Glasgow University Emblem Website. Retrieved on [[2007-03-26]].</ref><br /><br />[[Emblem book|Emblem]] illustrating practical atheism and its historical association with immorality, titled "Supreme Impiety: Atheist and Charlatan", from ''Picta poesis'', by [[Barthélemy Aneau]], 1552.]]
 
The broadest demarcation with respect to atheistic rationale is between practical and theoretical atheism. The different forms of theoretical atheism each derive from a particular rationale or philosophical argument. In contrast, practical atheism requires no specific argument, and can include indifference to and ignorance of the idea of gods.
 
=== Practical atheism ===
In ''practical'', or ''[[pragmatism|pragmatic]]'', atheism, also known as [[apatheism]], individuals live as if there are no gods and explain natural phenomena without resorting to the divine. The existence of gods is not denied, but may be designated unnecessary or useless; gods neither provide purpose to life, nor influence everyday life, according to this view.<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=20}}.</ref> A form of practical atheism with implications for the [[scientific community]] is [[methodological naturalism]]—the "tacit adoption or assumption of philosophical naturalism within [[scientific method]] with or without fully accepting or believing it."<ref name="neps">Schafersman, Steven D. "[http://www.freeinquiry.com/naturalism.html Naturalism is an Essential Part of Science and Critical Inquiry]". Conference on Naturalism, Theism and the Scientific Enterprise. Department of Philosophy, The University of Texas. February 1997. Revised May 2007. Retrieved on [[2007-04-09]].</ref>
 
Practical atheism can take various forms:
* Absence of religious motivation—belief in gods does not motivate moral action, religious action, or any other form of action;
* Active exclusion of the problem of gods and religion from intellectual pursuit and practical action;
* Indifference—the absence of any interest in the problems of gods and religion; or
* Ignorance—lacking any idea of gods.<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=21}}.</ref>
 
Historically, practical atheism has been associated with moral failure, willful ignorance and impiety. Those considered practical atheists were said to behave as though God, ethics and social responsibility did not exist; they abandoned duty and embraced [[hedonism]]. According to the French Catholic philosopher Étienne Borne, "Practical atheism is not the denial of the existence of God, but complete godlessness of action; it is a moral evil, implying not the denial of the absolute validity of the moral law but simply rebellion against that law."<ref>{{cite book | last = Borne | first = Étienne
| title = Atheism | year = 1961 | publisher = New York: Hawthorn Books | id = ISBN 0-415-04727-7}}</ref>
 
=== Theoretical atheism ===
{{Further|[[Existence of God]]}}
 
Theoretical, or contemplative, atheism explicitly posits arguments against the existence of gods, responding to common [[existence of God#Arguments for the existence of God|theistic arguments]] such as the [[argument from design]] or [[Pascal's Wager]]. The theoretical reasons for rejecting gods assume various psychological, sociological, metaphysical, and epistemological forms.
 
==== Epistemological arguments ====
{{Further|[[Agnostic atheism]], [[Theological noncognitivism]]}}
Epistemological atheism argues that people cannot know God or determine the existence of God. The foundation of epistemological atheism is [[agnosticism]], which takes a variety of forms. In the philosophy of [[immanence]], divinity is inseparable from the world itself, including a person's mind, and each person's [[consciousness]] is locked in the [[Subject (philosophy)|subject]]. According to this form of agnosticism, this limitation in perspective prevents any objective inference from belief in a god to assertions of its existence. The [[Rationalism|rationalistic]] agnosticism of [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] and the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] only accepts knowledge deduced with human rationality; this form of atheism holds that gods are not discernible as a matter of principle, and therefore cannot be known to exist. [[Philosophical skepticism|Skepticism]], based on the ideas of [[David Hume|Hume]], asserts that certainty about anything is impossible, so one can never know the existence of God. The allocation of agnosticism to atheism is disputed; it can also be regarded as an independent, basic world-view.<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=20}}.</ref>
 
Other forms of atheistic argumentation that may qualify as epistemological, including [[logical positivism]] and [[ignosticism]], assert the meaninglessness or unintelligibility of basic terms such as "God" and statements such as "God is all-powerful". [[Theological noncognitivism]] holds that the statement "God exists" does not express a proposition, but is nonsensical or cognitively meaningless. It has been argued both ways as to whether such individuals classify into some form of atheism or agnosticism. Philosophers [[Alfred Ayer|A. J. Ayer]] and [[Theodore M. Drange]] reject both categories, stating that both camps accept "God exists" as a proposition; they instead place noncognitivism in its own category.<ref>[[Theodore Drange|Drange, Theodore M.]] (1998). "[http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/definition.html Atheism, Agnosticism, Noncognitivism]". [[Internet Infidels]], ''Secular Web Library''. Retrieved on [[2007-04-07]].</ref><ref>[[Alfred Ayer|Ayer, A. J.]] (1946). ''Language, Truth and Logic''. Dover. pp. 115–116. In a footnote, Ayer attributes this view to "Professor H. H. Price".</ref>
 
==== Metaphysical arguments ====
{{Further|[[Monism]], [[Physicalism]]}}
Metaphysical atheism is based on metaphysical [[monism]]—the view that reality is homogeneous and indivisible. Absolute metaphysical atheists subscribe to some form of [[physicalism]], hence they explicitly deny the existence of non-physical beings. Relative metaphysical atheists maintain an implicit denial of a particular concept of God based on the incongruity between their individual philosophies and attributes commonly applied to God, such as [[transcendence (philosophy)|transcendence]], a [[Personal god|personal aspect]], or unity. Examples of relative metaphysical atheism include [[pantheism]], [[panentheism]], and [[deism]].<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=19}}.</ref>
 
[[دوتنه:Epikouros BM 1843.jpg|thumb|left|[[Epicurus]] is credited with first expounding the [[problem of evil]]. [[David Hume]] in his ''[[Dialogues concerning Natural Religion]]'' (1779) cited Epicurus in stating the argument as a series of questions:<br /><br />"Is [God] willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then is he
malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?"]]
 
==== Psychological, sociological and economical arguments ====
 
{{Further|[[Psychology of religion]], [[Neurotheology]]}}
Philosophers such as [[Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach|Ludwig Feuerbach]] and [[Sigmund Freud]] argued that God and other religious beliefs are human inventions, created to fulfill various psychological and emotional wants or needs. This is also the Buddhist view.<ref>Walpola Rahula, ''What the Buddha Taught.'' Grove Press, 1974. Pages 51–52.</ref> [[Karl Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels]], influenced by the work of Feuerbach, argued that belief in God and religion are social functions, used by those in power to oppress the working class. According to [[Mikhail Bakunin]], "the idea of God implies the abdication of human reason and justice; it is the most decisive negation of human liberty, and necessarily ends in the enslavement of mankind, in theory and practice." He reversed [[Voltaire]]'s famous aphorism that if God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him, writing instead that "if God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish Him."<ref>[[Michael Bakunin|Bakunin, Michael]] (1916). ''[http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bakunin/godandstate/godandstate_ch1.html God and the State]''. New York: Mother Earth Publishing Association. Retrieved on [[2007-04-12]].</ref>
 
==== Logical and evidential arguments ====
{{further|[[Existence of God#Deductive arguments (against)|Deductive arguments against the existence of God]], [[Problem of evil]], [[Argument from nonbelief|Divine hiddenness]]}}
Logical atheism holds that the various [[conceptions of God|conceptions of gods]], such as the [[personal god]] of Christianity, are ascribed logically inconsistent qualities. Such atheists present [[existence of God#Deductive arguments (against)|deductive arguments]] against the existence of God, which assert the incompatibility between certain traits, such as perfection, creator-status, [[immutability (theology)|immutability]], [[omniscience]], [[omnipresence]], [[omnibenevolence]], [[transcendence (philosophy)|transcendence]], personhood (a personal being), nonphysicality, [[justice]] and [[mercy]].<ref>Various authors. "Logical Arguments for Atheism". [[Internet Infidels]], ''The Secular Web Library''. Retrieved on [[2007-04-09]].</ref>
 
[[Theodicy|Theodicean]] atheists believe that the world as they experience it cannot be reconciled with the qualities commonly ascribed to God and gods by theologians. They argue that an [[omniscience|omniscient]], [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]] God is not compatible with a world where there is [[problem of evil|evil]] and [[suffering]], and where divine love is [[Divine hiddenness|hidden]] from many people.<ref>[[Theodore Drange|Drange, Theodore M.]] (1996). "[http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/aeanb.html The Arguments From Evil and Nonbelief]". [[Internet Infidels]], ''Secular Web Library''. Retrieved 2007-04-18.</ref> A similar argument is attributed to [[Siddhartha Gautama]], the founder of [[Buddhism]].<ref>V.A. Gunasekara, [http://www.buddhistinformation.com/buddhist_attitude_to_god.htm The Buddhist Attitude to God.] In the Bhuridatta Jataka, "The Buddha argues that the three most commonly given attributes of God, viz. omnipotence, omniscience and benevolence towards humanity cannot all be mutually compatible with the existential fact of dukkha."</ref>
 
==== Anthropocentric arguments ====
{{Further|[[Philosophical anthropology]], [[Humanism (life stance)|Humanism]]}}
[[Axiological]], or constructive, atheism rejects the existence of gods in favor of a "higher absolute", such as [[Human nature|humanity]].<!-- The previous wikilink is a disambig. page. Someone redirect it to human race, human nature, etc., etc. --> This form of atheism favors humanity as the absolute source of ethics and values, and permits individuals to resolve moral problems without resorting to God. Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, and Sartre all used this argument to convey messages of liberation, [[Übermensch|full-development]], and unfettered happiness.<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=20}}.</ref>
 
One of the most common [[criticism of atheism|criticisms of atheism]] has been to the contrary—that denying the existence of a just God leads to [[moral relativism]], leaving one with no moral or ethical foundation,<ref name="misconceptions">{{cite web |url=http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12346 |title=Common Misconceptions About Atheists and Atheism |accessdate=2006-10-21 |last=Gleeson |first=David |year=2006 |publisher=''American Chronicle''}}</ref> or renders life [[meaning of life (religious)|meaningless]] and miserable.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1979|p=275}}. "Perhaps the most common criticism of atheism is the claim that it leads inevitably to moral bankruptcy."</ref> [[Blaise Pascal]] argued this view in 1669.<ref>[[Blaise Pascal|Pascal, Blaise]] (1669). ''[[Pensées]]'', II: "The Misery of Man Without God".</ref>
 
== History ==
{{main|History of atheism}}
 
Although the term ''atheism'' originated in 16th-century [[France]], ideas that would be recognized today as atheistic are documented from [[classical antiquity]] and the [[Vedic period]].
 
=== Early Indic religion ===
{{main|Atheism in Hinduism}}
[[Atheism in Hinduism|Atheistic schools]] are found in [[Hinduism]], which is otherwise a very theistic religion. The thoroughly materialistic and anti-religious philosophical [[Cārvāka]] School that originated in [[India]] around [[6th century BCE]] is probably the most explicitly atheistic school of philosophy in India. This branch of Indian philosophy is classified as a [[nastika|heterodox]] system and is not considered part of the six orthodox schools of Hinduism, but it is noteworthy as evidence of a materialistic movement within Hinduism.<ref>Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and Charles A. Moore. ''A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy''. (Princeton University Press: 1957, Twelfth Princeton Paperback printing 1989) pp. 227–249. ISBN 0-691-01958-4.</ref> Chatterjee and Datta explain that our understanding of Cārvāka philosophy is fragmentary, based largely on criticism of the ideas by other schools, and that it is not a living tradition:
 
<blockquote>
"Though materialism in some form or other has always been present in India, and occasional references are found in the Vedas, the Buddhistic literature, the Epics, as well as in the later philosophical works we do not find any systematic work on materialism, nor any organised school of followers as the other philosophical schools possess. But almost every work of the other schools states, for reputation, the materialistic views. Our knowledge of Indian materialism is chiefly based on these."<ref>Satischandra Chatterjee and Dhirendramohan Datta. ''An Introduction to Indian Philosophy''. Eighth Reprint Edition. (University of Calcutta: 1984). p. 55.</ref>
</blockquote>
 
Other Indian philosophies generally regarded as atheistic include [[Samkhya|Classical Samkhya]] and [[Mimamsa|Purva Mimamsa]]. The rejection of a personal creator God is also seen in [[Jainism]] and [[Buddhism]] in India.<ref name="Joshi">{{cite journal |last=Joshi |first=L.R. |year=1966 |title= A New Interpretation of Indian Atheism |journal=Philosophy East and West |volume=16 |issue=3/4 |pages=189–206|url=http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0031-8221(196607%2F10)16%3A3%2F4%3C189%3AANIOIA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S}}</ref>
 
=== Classical antiquity ===
[[دوتنه:Socrates Louvre.jpg|thumb|right|In [[Plato|Plato's]] ''[[Apology (Plato)|Apology]]'', [[Socrates]] (pictured) was accused by [[Meletus]] of not believing in the gods.]]
Western atheism has its roots in [[Pre-Socratic philosophy|pre-Socratic]] [[Greek philosophy]], but did not emerge as a distinct world-view until the late [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]].<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|pp=73–74}}. "Atheism had its origins in Ancient Greece but did not emerge as an overt and avowed belief system until late in the Enlightenment."</ref> The 5th-century BCE Greek philosopher [[Diagoras]] is known as the "first atheist",<ref>Solmsen, Friedrich (1942). ''[http://books.google.com/books?vid=0blEqYn0npw5h4r_qPHc_fk&id=rLASAAAAIAAJ&pgis=1 Plato's Theology]''. Cornell University Press. p 25.</ref> and strongly criticized religion and mysticism. [[Critias]] viewed religion as a human invention used to frighten people into following moral order.<ref>"[http://search.eb.com/eb/article-38045 religion, study of]". (2007). In ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. Retrieved on [[April 2, 2007]].</ref> [[Atomism|Atomists]] such as [[Democritus]] attempted to explain the world in a purely [[materialism|materialistic]] way, without reference to the spiritual or mystical. Other pre-Socratic philosophers who probably had atheistic views included [[Prodicus]], [[Protagoras]], and [[Theodorus the Atheist|Theodorus]].
 
[[Socrates]] was accused of being an atheist for [[impiety]] (see [[Euthyphro dilemma]]) on the basis that he inspired questioning of the [[state religion|state gods]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bartleby.com/65/at/atheism.html |title=Atheism |accessdate=2007-04-12 |year=2005 |work=The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition |publisher=Columbia University Press}}</ref> Although he disputed the accusation that he was a "complete atheist",<ref>{{cite book |first=Thomas C. |last=Brickhouse |coauthors=Nicholas D. Smith |title=Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Plato and the Trial of Socrates |year=2004 |publisher=Routledge |id=ISBN 0-415-15681-5 |pages=p. 112}} In particular, he argues that the claim he is a complete atheist contradicts the other part of the indictment, that he introduced "new divinities".</ref> he was ultimately [[Trial of Socrates|sentenced to death]].
 
Another atomic materialist, [[Epicurus]], disputed many religious doctrines, including the existence of an [[afterlife]] or a [[personal god|personal deity]]; he considered the [[soul]] purely material and mortal. While [[Epicureanism]] did not rule out the existence of gods, he believed that if they did exist, they were unconcerned with humanity.<ref name="BBC">{{cite web | author=BBC |authorlink = BBC |title = Ethics and Religion—Atheism | url = http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/ | accessdate = 2007-04-12 | publisher = [[bbc.co.uk]]}}</ref>
 
The Roman poet [[Lucretius]] agreed that, if there were gods, they were unconcerned with humanity and unable to affect the natural world. For this reason, he believed humanity should have no fear of the supernatural. In ''[[De rerum natura]]'' ("On the nature of things"), he expounds his Epicurean views of the cosmos, atoms, the soul, mortality, and religion.<ref>{{gutenberg|no=785|name=On the Nature of Things by Lucretius}} Book I, "Substance is Eternal". Translated by W.E. Leonard. 1997. Retrieved on [[2007-04-12]].</ref>
 
The Roman philosopher [[Sextus Empiricus]] held that one should suspend judgment about virtually all beliefs—a form of skepticism known as [[Pyrrhonism]]—that nothing was inherently evil, and that [[ataraxia]] ("peace of mind") is attainable by withholding one's judgment. His relatively large volume of surviving works had a lasting influence on later philosophers.<ref name="gordonstein">Stein, Gordon (Ed.) (1980). "[http://www.positiveatheism.org/india/s1990c25.htm The History of Freethought and Atheism]". ''An Anthology of Atheism and Rationalism''. New York: Prometheus. Retrieved on [[2007-04-03]].</ref>
 
The meaning of "atheist" changed over the course of classical antiquity. The early Christians were labeled atheists by non-Christians because of their disbelief in pagan gods.<ref name="cathencyc-atheism">{{ws|"[[s:Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Atheism|Atheism]]" in the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> During the [[Roman Empire]], Christians were executed for their rejection of the [[List of Roman deities|Roman gods]] in general and Emperor-worship in particular. When Christianity became the state religion of Rome under [[Theodosius I]] in 381, [[Christian heresy|heresy]] became a punishable offense.<ref>Maycock, A. L. and Ronald Knox (2003). ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=DmL8CljbqDwC Inquisition from Its Establishment to the Great Schism: An Introductory Study]''. ISBN 0-7661-7290-2.</ref>
 
=== Early Middle Ages to the Renaissance ===
 
The espousal of atheistic views was rare in Europe during the [[Early Middle Ages]] and [[Middle Ages]] (see [[Medieval Inquisition]]); metaphysics, religion and theology were the dominant interests.<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=4}}</ref> There were, however, movements within this period that forwarded heterodox conceptions of the Christian God, including differing views of the nature, transcendence, and knowability of God. Individuals and groups such as [[Johannes Scotus Eriugena]], [[David of Dinant]], [[Amalric of Bena]], and the [[Brethren of the Free Spirit]] maintained Christian viewpoints with [[pantheism|pantheistic]] tendencies. [[Nicholas of Cusa]] held to a form of [[fideism]] he called ''[[De Docta Ignorantia|docta ignorantia]]'' ("learned ignorance"), asserting that God is beyond human categorization, and our knowledge of God is limited to conjecture. [[William of Ockham]] inspired anti-metaphysical tendencies with his [[nominalism|nominalistic]] limitation of human knowledge to singular objects, and asserted that the divine [[essence]] could not be intuitively or rationally apprehended by human intellect. Followers of Ockham, such as [[John of Mirecourt]] and [[Nicholas of Autrecourt]] furthered this view. The resulting division between faith and reason influenced later theologians such as [[John Wycliffe]], [[Jan Hus]], and [[Martin Luther]].<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=4}}.</ref>
 
The [[Renaissance]] did much to expand the scope of freethought and skeptical inquiry. Individuals such as [[Leonardo da Vinci]] sought experimentation as a means of explanation, and opposed [[Appeal to authority|arguments from religious authority]]. Other critics of religion and the Church during this time included [[Niccolò Machiavelli]], [[Bonaventure des Périers]], and [[François Rabelais]].<ref name="gordonstein"/>
 
=== Early Modern Period ===
The [[Renaissance]] and [[Reformation]] eras witnessed a resurgence in religious fervor, as evidenced by the proliferation of new religious orders, confraternities, and popular devotions in the Catholic world, and the appearance of increasingly austere Protestant sects such as the [[Calvinists]]. This era of interconfessional rivalry permitted an even wider scope of theological and philosophical speculation, much of which would later be used to advance a religiously skeptical world-view.
 
[[Criticism of Christianity]] became increasingly frequent in the 17th and 18th centuries, especially in France and England, where there appears to have been a religious [[malaise]], according to contemporary sources. Some Protestant thinkers, such as [[Thomas Hobbes]], espoused a materialist philosophy and skepticism toward supernatural occurrences. In the late 17th century, [[Deism]] came to be openly espoused by intellectuals such as [[John Toland (Irish Philosopher)|John Toland]], and practically all the ''[[philosophe]]s'' of 18th-century France and England held to some form of Deism. Despite their ridicule of Christianity, many Deists held atheism in scorn. The first known atheist who threw off the mantle of deism, bluntly denying the existence of gods, was [[Jean Meslier]], a French priest that lived in the early 18th century.<ref>Michel Onfray on Jean Meslier:http://www.wpunj.edu/newpol/issue40/Onfray40.htm</ref> He was followed by other openly atheistic thinkers, such as [[Baron d'Holbach]], who appeared in the late 18th century, when expressing disbelief in God became a less dangerous position.<ref>{{cite book | last = d'Holbach | first = P. H. T. | authorlink = Baron d'Holbach | title = The system of nature | url = http://www.fullbooks.com/The-System-of-Nature-Vol-2.html | accessdate = 2007-10-31 | year = 1770}}</ref> [[David Hume]] was the most systematic exponent of Enlightenment thought, developing a skeptical epistemology grounded in empiricism, undermining the metaphysical basis of natural theology.
 
[[دوتنه:Feuerbach Ludwig.jpg|thumb|right|[[Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach|Ludwig Feuerbach]]'s ''[[The Essence of Christianity]]'' (1841) would greatly influence philosophers such as [[Friedrich Engels|Engels]], [[Karl Marx|Marx]], [[David Strauss]], and [[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]]. He considered God to be a human invention and religious activities to be wish-fulfillment.]]
 
The [[French Revolution]] took atheism outside the salons and into the public sphere. Attempts to enforce the [[Civil Constitution of the Clergy]] led to anti-clerical violence and the expulsion of many clergy from France. The chaotic political events in revolutionary Paris eventually enabled the more radical [[Jacobin Club|Jacobins]] to seize power in 1793, ushering in the [[Reign of Terror]]. At its climax, the more militant atheists attempted to forcibly de-Christianize France, replacing religion with a [[Cult of Reason]]. These persecutions ended with the [[Thermidorian Reaction]], but some of the secularizing measures of this period remained a permanent legacy of French politics.
 
The [[Napoleonic era]] institutionalized the secularization of French society, and exported the revolution to northern Italy, in the hopes of creating pliable republics. In the nineteenth century, many atheists and other anti-religious thinkers devoted their efforts to political and social revolution, facilitating the [[Revolutions of 1848|upheavals of 1848]], the [[Italian unification|Risorgimento]] in Italy, and the growth of an international [[socialism|socialist]] movement.
 
In the latter half of the 19th century, atheism rose to prominence under the influence of [[rationalism|rationalistic]] and [[freethought|freethinking]] philosophers. Many prominent German philosophers of this era denied the existence of deities and were critical of religion, including [[Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach|Ludwig Feuerbach]], [[Arthur Schopenhauer]], [[Karl Marx]], and [[Friedrich Nietzsche]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BKz2FcDrFy0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=nietzsche+schopenhauer+marx+feuerbach&ots=Uj5_B0kDbS&sig=1lXbokGVRbwxqAIbmcOwL033N88 |title=Subjectivity and Irreligion: Atheism and Agnosticism in Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche |publisher=Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. |accessdate=2007-04-12 |last=Ray |first=Matthew Alun |date=[[2003]]}}</ref>
<br style="clear: left" />
 
=== شلمه پېړۍ ===
Atheism in the 20th century, particularly in the form of practical atheism, advanced in many societies. Atheistic thought found recognition in a wide variety of other, broader philosophies, such as [[existentialism]], [[Objectivism (Ayn Rand)|Objectivism]], [[secular humanism]], [[nihilism]], [[logical positivism]], [[Marxism]], [[feminism]],<ref>Overall, Christine. "Feminism and Atheism", in {{harvnb|Martin|2007|pp=233–246}}.</ref> and the general scientific and [[rationalist movement]].
 
Logical positivism and [[scientism]] paved the way for [[neopositivism]], [[analytical philosophy]], [[structuralism]], and [[naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]]. Neopositivism and analytical philosophy discarded classical rationalism and metaphysics in favor of strict empiricism and epistemological [[nominalism]]. Proponents such as [[Bertrand Russell]] emphatically rejected belief in God. In his early work, [[Ludwig Wittgenstein]] attempted to separate metaphysical and supernatural language from rational discourse. [[A. J. Ayer]] asserted the unverifiability and meaninglessness of religious statements, citing his adherence to the empirical sciences. Relatedly the applied [[structuralism]] of [[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss]] sourced religious language to the human subconscious in denying its transcendental meaning. [[John Niemeyer Findlay|J. N. Findlay]] and [[J. J. C. Smart]] argued that the existence of God is not logically necessary. Naturalists and materialistic monists such as [[John Dewey]] considered the natural world to be the basis of everything, denying the existence of God or immortality.<ref>{{harvnb|Zdybicka|2005|p=16}}.</ref><ref name="stanford"/>
 
The 20th century also saw the political advancement of atheism, spurred on by interpretation of the works of [[Karl Marx|Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels|Engels]]. After the 1917 revolution in Russia, increased religious freedom for minority religions lasted for a few years, before the policies of Stalinism turned towards repression of religion. The [[Soviet Union]] and other [[communist state]]s promoted [[state atheism]] and opposed religion, often by violent means.<ref>{{cite book| last=Solzhenitsyn |first= Aleksandr I.| title=The Gulag Archipelago| publisher=Harper Perennial Modern Classics|id=ISBN 0-06-000776-1}}</ref><!--
-->
Other leaders like [[E. V. Ramasami Naicker]] (Periyar), a prominent atheist leader of India, fought against [[Hinduism]] and [[Brahmins]] for discriminating and dividing people in the name of [[caste]] and religion.<ref>{{cite book |last=Michael |first=S. M. |year=1999 |chapter=Dalit Visions of a Just Society |editor= S. M. Michael (ed.) |publisher=Lynne Rienner Publishers |title=Untouchable: Dalits in Modern India |id=ISBN 1-55587-697-8 |pages=pp. 31–33}}</ref> This was highlighted in 1956 when he made the Hindu god [[Rama]] wear a garland made of slippers and made [[antitheism|antitheistic]] statements.<ref>"He who created god was a fool, he who spreads his name is a scoundrel, and he who worships him is a barbarian." [[Finngeir Hiorth|Hiorth, Finngeir]] (1996). "[http://www.iheu.org/node/548 Atheism in South India]". [[International Humanist and Ethical Union]], ''International Humanist News''. Retrieved on [[2007-05-30]].</ref>
 
In 1966, ''[[Time (magazine)|''TIME'']]'' magazine asked "Is God Dead?"<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19660408,00.html ''TIME Magazine'' cover] online. 8 Apr 1966. Retrieved 2007-04-17.</ref> in response to the [[God is dead#Death of God theological movement|Death of God theological movement]], citing the estimation that nearly one in two people in the world lived under an anti-religious power and millions more in Africa, Asia, and South America seemed to lack knowledge of the Christian God.<ref>"[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,835309,00.html Toward a Hidden God]". ''TIME Magazine'' online. 8 Apr 1966. Retrieved 2007-04-17.</ref> The following year, the [[Albania]]n government under [[Enver Hoxha]] announced the closure of all religious institutions in the country, declaring [[Albania]] the world's first atheist state.<ref>Majeska, George P. (1976). "[http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0037-6752(197622)1%3A20%3A2%3C204%3ARAAITU%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G Religion and Atheism in the U.S.S.R. and Eastern Europe, Review]". ''The Slavic and East European Journal''. '''20'''(2). pp. 204–206.</ref> These regimes enhanced the negative associations of atheism, especially where anti-communist sentiment was strong in the United States, despite the fact that some prominent atheists were anti-communist.<ref>{{cite journal |quotes= |last=Rafford |first=R.L. |year=1987 |title=Atheophobia—an introduction |journal= Religious Humanism|volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=32–37 }}</ref> Since the fall of the [[Berlin Wall]], the number of actively anti-religious regimes has reduced considerably. In 2006, Timothy Shah of the [[Pew Research Center|Pew Forum]] noted "a worldwide trend across all major religious groups, in which God-based and faith-based movements in general are experiencing increasing confidence and influence vis-à-vis secular movements and ideologies."<ref>"[http://pewforum.org/events/?EventID=119 Timothy Samuel Shah Explains 'Why God is Winning']". 2006-07-18. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Retrieved 2007-04-18.</ref> [[Gregory S. Paul]] and Phil Zuckerman consider this a myth and suggest that the actual situation is more complex and nuanced.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Gregory |last=Paul |authorlink=Gregory S. Paul |coauthors=Phil Zuckerman |title=Why the Gods Are Not Winning |journal=Edge |volume=209 |year=2007 |url=http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge209.html#gp |accessdate=2007-05-16}}</ref>
 
== Demographics ==
{{main|Demographics of atheism}}
 
It is difficult to quantify the number of atheists in the world. Respondents to religious-belief polls may define "atheism" differently or draw different distinctions between ''atheism'', non-religious beliefs, and non-theistic religious and spiritual beliefs. In addition, people in some regions of the world refrain from reporting themselves as atheists to avoid social stigma, [[Discrimination of atheists|discrimination]], and [[persecution of atheists|persecution]]. A 2005 survey published in ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' found that the non-religious make up about 11.9% of the world's population, and atheists about 2.3%. This figure does not include those who follow atheistic religions, such as some Buddhists.<ref name="Britannica demographics">{{cite web
|url=http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9432620
|title=Worldwide Adherents of All Religions by Six Continental Areas, Mid-2005
|publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica
|date=2005
|accessdate=2007-04-15}}
* 2.3% Atheists: Persons professing atheism, skepticism, disbelief, or irreligion, including the militantly antireligious (opposed to all religion).
* 11.9% Nonreligious: Persons professing no religion, nonbelievers, agnostics, freethinkers, uninterested, or dereligionized secularists indifferent to all religion but not militantly so.
</ref> A November–December 2006 poll published in the ''[[Financial Times]]'' gives rates for the United States and five European countries. It found that Americans are more likely than Europeans to believe in any form of god or supreme being (73%). Of the European adults surveyed, Italians are the most likely to express this belief (62%) and the French the least likely (27%). In France, 32% declared themselves atheists, and an additional 32% declared themselves [[agnostic]].<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131
|title=Religious Views and Beliefs Vary Greatly by Country, According to the Latest Financial Times/Harris Poll
|publisher=Financial Times/Harris Interactive
|date=[[2006-12-20]]
|accessdate=2007-01-17}}</ref> An official [[European Union]] survey provides corresponding figures: 18% of the EU population do not believe in a god; 27% accept the existence of some supernatural "spiritual life force", while 52% affirm belief in a specific god. The proportion of believers rises to 65% among those who had left school by the age of fifteen; survey respondents who considered themselves to be from a strict family background were more likely to believe in god than those who felt their upbringing lacked firm rules.<ref>{{cite book
| last =
| first =
| authorlink =
| coauthors =
| title =Social values, Science and Technology
| publisher =Directorate General Research, European Union
| date =2005
| location =
| pages = pp 7–11
| url =http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_225_report_en.pdf
| doi =
| id =
| isbn = }}</ref>
 
A letter published in ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' in 1998 reported a survey suggesting that belief in a personal god or [[afterlife]] was at an all-time low among the members of the U.S. [[National Academy of Science]], only 7.0% of whom believed in a personal god as compared to more than 85% of the general U.S. population.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Correspondence: Leading scientists still reject God |last=Larson |first=Edward J. |coauthors=Larry Witham |year=1998 |journal=Nature |volume=394 |issue= 6691 |pages=313}} Available at [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html StephenJayGould.org], Stephen Jay Gould archive. Retrieved on [[2006-12-17]]</ref> In the same year [[Frank Sulloway]] of [[MIT]] and [[Michael Shermer]] of [[California State University]] conducted a study which found in their polling sample of "credentialed" U.S. adults (12% had Ph.Ds and 62% were college graduates) 64% believed in God, and there was a [[correlation]] indicating that religious conviction diminished with education level.<ref>{{cite book
| last =Shermer
| first =Michael
| authorlink =Michael Shermer
| coauthors =
| title =How We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God
| publisher =William H Freeman
| date =1999
| location =New York
| pages = pp76–79
| url =
| doi =
| id =ISBN 0-7167-3561-X }}</ref>
Such an inverse [[correlation]] between [[religiosity and intelligence]] has been found by 39 studies carried out between 1927 and 2002, according to an article in ''Mensa Magazine''.<ref>According to Dawkins (2006), p. 103. Dawkins cites Bell, Paul. "Would you believe it?" ''Mensa Magazine'', UK Edition, Feb. 2002, pp. 12–13. Analyzing 43 studies carried out since 1927, Bell found that all but four reported such a connection, and he concluded that "the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold 'beliefs' of any kind."</ref> These findings broadly concur with a 1958 statistical [[meta-analysis]] from Professor [[Michael Argyle (psychologist)|Michael Argyle]] of [[Oxford University]]. He analyzed seven research studies that had investigated correlation between attitude to religion and [[Intelligence quotient|measured intelligence]] among school and college students from the U.S. Although a clear negative correlation was found, the analysis did not identify causality but noted that factors such as authoritarian family background and social class may also have played a part.<ref>{{cite book
| last =Argyle
| first =Michael
| authorlink =Michael Argyle
| coauthors =
| title =Religious Behaviour
| publisher =Routledge and Kegan Paul
| date =1958
| location =London
| pages = pp 93–96
| url =
| doi =
| id = ISBN 0-415-17589-5 }}</ref>
 
However, evidence on the relationship between religious belief and educational achievement is mixed. Some research in the United States has found that religious participation among religious people is correlated with greater educational attainment and scholastic performance. The effect of religion on education can differ depending on what type of religion a student professes. [[Fundamentalist]] Christians, especially women, tend to acquire fewer years of education than others do.<ref>Lehrer, E.L. (2004). "Religiosity as a Determinant of Educational Attainment." ''Review of Economics of the Household'' 2:205.</ref><ref>Sherkat, D.E. ''[http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Sherkat/ Religion and Higher Education: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly]''. Social Science Research Council: 6 Feb. 2006. Retrieved 16 June 2007.</ref>
 
== Atheism, religion and morality ==
{{main|Atheism and religion|Secular ethics}}
[[دوتنه:Lightmatter buddha3.jpg|thumb|left|Because of [[God in Buddhism|its absence]] of a [[personal god]], [[Buddhism]] is commonly described as nontheistic.]]
 
Although people who self-identify as atheists are usually assumed to be [[irreligion|irreligious]], some sects within major religions reject the existence of a personal, creator deity.<ref name="winston2">{{cite book | last = Winston | first = Robert (Ed.) | title = Human | publisher = New York: DK Publishing, Inc | year = 2004 | id = ISBN 0-7566-1901-7 | pages = p. 299 | quote=Nonbelief has existed for centuries. For example, Buddhism and Jainism have been called atheistic religions because they do not advocate belief in gods.}}</ref> In recent years, certain religious denominations have accumulated a number of openly atheistic followers, such as [[atheist Jew|atheistic]] or [[humanistic Judaism]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/judaism/subdivisions/humanistic.shtml |title=Humanistic Judaism |date=[[2006-07-20]] |accessdate=2006-10-25 |publisher=[[BBC]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last = Levin | first = S. | year = 1995 | month = May | title = Jewish Atheism | journal = New Humanist | volume = 110 | issue = 2 | pages = 13–15}}</ref> and [[Agnostic theism|Christian atheists]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/types/christianatheism.shtml |title=Christian Atheism |date=[[2006-05-17]] |accessdate=2006-10-25 |publisher=[[BBC]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book | last = Altizer | first = Thomas J. J. | authorlink = Thomas J. J. Altizer | title = The Gospel of Christian Atheism | url = http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=523 | accessdate = 2006-10-27 | year = 1967 | publisher = London: Collins | pages = 102–103}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last = Lyas | first = Colin | year = 1970 | month = January | title = On the Coherence of Christian Atheism | journal = Philosophy: The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy | volume = 45 | issue = 171 | pages = 1–19}}</ref>
 
As the strictest sense of positive atheism does not entail any specific beliefs outside of disbelief in God, atheists can hold any number of spiritual beliefs. For the same reason, atheists can hold a wide variety of ethical beliefs, ranging from the [[moral universalism]] of [[humanism]], which holds that a moral code should be applied consistently to all humans, to [[moral nihilism]], which holds that morality is meaningless.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1979|pp=21–22}}.</ref>
 
Many philosophers, however, have equated atheism with immorality, arguing that morality must be derived from God and cannot exist without a wise creator.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1979|p=275}}. "Among the many myths associated with religion, none is more widespread—or more disastrous in its effects—than the myth that moral values cannot be divorced from the belief in a god."</ref><ref>In [[Dostoevsky]]'s ''[[The Brothers Karamazov]]'' (Book Eleven: ''Brother Ivan Fyodorovich'', Chapter 4) there is the famous argument that ''If there is no God, all things are permitted.'': "'But what will become of men then?' I asked him, 'without God and immortal life? All things are lawful then, they can do what they like?'"</ref><ref name = "Kant CPR A811"> For [[Kant]], the presupposition of God, soul, and freedom was a practical concern, for "Morality, by itself, constitutes a system, but happiness does not, unless it is distributed in exact proportion to morality. This, however, is possible in an intelligible world only under a wise author and ruler. Reason compels us to admit such a ruler, together with life in such a world, which we must consider as future life, or else all moral laws are to be considered as idle dreams..." (''Critique of Pure Reason'', A811).</ref> Moral precepts such as "murder is wrong" are seen as [[divine law]]s, requiring a divine lawmaker and judge. However, many atheists argue that treating morality legalistically involves a [[false analogy]], and that morality does not depend upon a lawmaker in the same way that laws do,<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|p=38}}.</ref> based on the [[Euthyphro dilemma]], which either renders God unnecessary or morality arbitrary.<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|p=39}}.</ref>
 
Philosophers [[Susan Neiman]]<ref>{{cite video| people =[[Susan Neiman]]| title =Beyond Belief Session 6| medium =Conference| publisher =The Science Network| location =[[Salk Institute]], La Jolla, CA| date = Sunday, November 6, 2006 }}</ref> and [[Julian Baggini]]<ref> {{harvnb|Baggini|2003|p=40}}</ref> (among others) assert that behaving ethically only because of divine mandate is not true ethical behavior but merely blind obedience. Baggini argues that atheism is a superior basis for ethics, claiming that a moral basis external to religious imperatives is necessary to evaluate the morality of the imperatives themselves—to be able to discern, for example, that "thou shalt steal" is immoral even if one's religion instructs it—and that atheists, therefore, have the advantage of being more inclined to make such evaluations.<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|p=43}}.</ref>
 
Atheists such as [[Sam Harris (author)|Sam Harris]] have argued that Western religions' reliance on divine authority lends itself to [[authoritarianism]] and [[dogma]]tism.<ref>{{cite web | last = Harris | first = Sam | authorlink = Sam Harris (author) | title = The Myth of Secular Moral Chaos | url = http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=sharris_26_3 | accessdate = 2006-10-29 | publisher = [[Free Inquiry]] | year = 2006a}}</ref> Indeed, [[religious fundamentalism]] and [[psychology of religion|extrinsic religion]] (when religion is held because it serves other, more ultimate interests<ref name=Moreira-almeida2006>{{cite journal | author = Moreira-almeida, A. | coauthors = Lotufo Neto, F.; Koenig, H.G. | year = 2006 | title = Religiousness and mental health: a review | journal = Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria | volume = 28 | pages = 242–250 | url = http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1516-44462006000300018&script=sci_arttext | accessdate = 2007-07-12 }}</ref>) have been correlated with authoritarianism, dogmatism, and prejudice.<ref>See for example: Kahoe, R.D. (June 1977). "[http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-8294(197706)16%3A2%3C179%3AIRAAAD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X Intrinsic Religion and Authoritarianism: A Differentiated Relationship]". ''Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion''. '''16'''(2). pp. 179–182. Also see: Altemeyer, Bob and Bruce Hunsberger (1992). "[http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327582ijpr0202_5?journalCode=ijpr Authoritarianism, Religious Fundamentalism, Quest, and Prejudice]". ''International Journal for the Psychology of Religion''. '''2'''(2). pp. 113–133.</ref> This argument, combined with historical events that are argued to demonstrate the dangers of religion, such as the [[Crusade]]s, [[inquisition]]s, and [[witch trial]]s, are often used by [[antireligion|antireligious]] atheists to justify their views.<ref>{{cite web | last = Harris | first = Sam | authorlink = Sam Harris (author) | title = An Atheist Manifesto | url = http://www.truthdig.com/dig/print/200512_an_atheist_manifesto | accessdate = 2006-10-29 | publisher = [[Truthdig]] | year = 2005 | quote = In a world riven by ignorance, only the atheist refuses to deny the obvious: Religious faith promotes human violence to an astonishing degree.}}</ref> Theists have made very similar arguments, however, against atheists based on the [[state atheism]] of [[communist state]]s.<ref>{{cite book | last = McGrath | first = Alister | authorlink = Alister McGrath | title = The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World | year = 2005 | url = http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/march/21.36.html | accessdate = 2006-10-27 | id = ISBN 0-385-50062-9}}</ref>
 
== دا هم وګورﺉ ==
* [[List of atheists]]
* [[List of atheist organizations]]
* [[Discrimination against atheists]]
 
== Further reading ==
* {{cite book
| last = Berman
| first = David
| title = A History of Atheism in Britain: From Hobbes to Russell
| year = 1990
| publisher = London: Routledge
| id = ISBN 0-415-04727-7}}
* {{cite book
| last = Buckley
| first = M. J.
| title = At the Origins of Modern Atheism
| year = 1990
| id = ISBN 0-300-04897-1
| publisher = New Haven, CT: Yale University Press}}
* {{cite book
| last = Dawkins
| first = Richard
| authorlink = Richard Dawkins
| title = [[The God Delusion]]
| year = 2006
| publisher = Bantam Press
| id = ISBN 0-593-05548-9 }}
* {{cite book
| last = Flew
| first = Antony
| authorlink = Antony Flew
| title = God and Philosophy
| publisher = Prometheus Books
| id = ISBN 1-59102-330-0
| year = 2005}}
* Flynn, Tom, ed. (2007). ''The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief''. Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-59102-391-2.
* {{citation
| editor = Gaskin, J.C.A.
| title = Varieties of Unbelief: From Epicurus to Sartre
| publisher = New York: Macmillan
| year = 1989
| id = ISBN 0-02-340681-X}}
* {{cite book
| last = Harbour
| first = Daniel
| title = [[An Intelligent Person's Guide to Atheism]]
| publisher = London: Duckworth
| id = ISBN 0-7156-3229-9}}
* {{cite book
| last = Harris
| first = Sam
| authorlink = Sam Harris (author)
| title = [[Letter to a Christian Nation]]
| publisher = Knopf (September 19, 2006)
| id = ISBN 978-0-307-26577-7}}
* {{cite book
| last = Hitchens
| first = Christopher
| authorlink = Christopher Hitchens
| title = [[God is not Great|God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything]]
| publisher = Twelve (May 1, 2007)
| id = ISBN 978-0-446-57980-3}}
* {{cite book
| last = Jacoby
| first = Susan
| title = Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism
| year = 2004
| publisher = Metropolitan Books
| id = ISBN 978-0-8050-7442-0}}
* {{cite book
| last = Krueger
| first = D. E.
| title = What is Atheism?: A Short Introduction
| publisher = New York: Prometheus
| year = 1998
| id = ISBN 1-57392-214-5}}
* {{cite book
| last = Le Poidevin
| first = R.
| title = Arguing for Atheism: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion
| publisher = London: Routledge
| year = 1996
| id = ISBN 0-415-09338-4}}
* [[J. L. Mackie|Mackie, J. L.]] (1982). ''The Miracle of Theism: Arguments For and Against the Existence of God.'' Oxford: Oxford UP. ISBN 0-19-824682-X
* {{cite book
| last = Maritain
| first = Jacques
| title = The Range of Reason
| publisher = London: Geoffrey Bles
| year = 1953
| id = ISBN B0007DKP00
| url = http://www.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/range.htm
| accessdate = 2006-10-27}}
* {{cite book
| last = Martin
| first = Michael
| authorlink = Michael Martin (philosopher)
| title = Atheism: A Philosophical Justification
| publisher = Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press
| year = 1990
| id = ISBN 0-87722-943-0}}
* Martin, Michael, ed. (2007). ''The Cambridge Companion to Atheism.'' Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-60367-6
* Martin, Michael & Monnier, R., eds. (2003). ''The Impossibility of God.'' Amherst, NY: Prometheus. ISBN 1-59102-120-0
* Martin, Michael & Monnier, R., eds. (2006). ''The Improbability of God.'' Amherst, NY: Prometheus. ISBN 1-59102-381-5
* McTaggart, John & McTaggart, Ellis (1930). ''Some Dogmas of Religion.'' London: Edward Arnold & Co., new edition. [First published 1906] ISBN 0-548-14955-0
* {{cite book
| last = Nielsen
| first = Kai
| authorlink = Kai Nielsen
| title = Philosophy and Atheism
| year = 1985
| publisher = New York: Prometheus
| id = ISBN ISBN 0-87975-289-0}}
* {{cite book
| last = Nielsen
| first = Kai
| authorlink = Kai Nielsen
| title = Naturalism and Religion
| year = 2001
| id = ISBN 1-57392-853-4
| publisher = New York: Prometheus}}
* {{Cite book
| last = Oppy
| first = Graham
| authorlink = Graham Oppy
| year = 2006
| title = Arguing about Gods
| publisher = Cambridge University Press
| id = ISBN 0-521-86386-4}}
* {{cite book
| last = Robinson
| first = Richard
| title = An Atheist's Values
| url = http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/athval0.htm
| id = ISBN 0-19-824191-7
| publisher = Oxford: Clarendon Press
| year = 1964}}
* {{cite book
| last = Sharpe
| first = R.A.
| title = The Moral Case Against Religious Belief
| publisher = London: SCM Press
| year = 1997
| id = ISBN 0-334-02680-6}}
* [[George H. Smith|Smith, George]] ''Atheism: The Case Against God'', (1974). ISBN 0-87975-124-X
* Stenger, Victor J. (2007). ''God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows that God Does Not Exist.'' Amherst, NY: Prometheus. ISBN 1-59102-481-1
* {{cite book
| last = Thrower
| first = James
| title = A Short History of Western Atheism
| publisher = London: Pemberton
| year = 1971
| id = ISBN 0-301-71101-1}}
 
== سرچینې او نوټ ==
{{reflist}}
 
* {{citation
| last = Baggini
| first = Julian
| authorlink = Julian Baggini
| title = Atheism: A Very Short Introduction
| year = 2003
| publisher = Oxford: Oxford University Press
| id = ISBN 0-19-280424-3}}
* {{citation
| editor-last = Martin
| editor-first = Michael
| editor-link = Michael Martin (philosopher)
| title = The Cambridge Companion to Atheism
| publisher = Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
| year = 2007
| id = ISBN 0-521-60367-6}}
* {{citation
| last = Smith
| first = George H.
| authorlink = George H. Smith
| title = Atheism: The Case Against God
| year = 1979
| publisher = Buffalo, New York: Prometheus
| id = ISBN 0-87975-124-X}}
* {{citation
| last = Zdybicka
| first = Zofia J.
| authorlink = Zofia Zdybicka
| year = 2005
| contribution = Atheism
| contribution-url = http://www.ptta.pl/pef/angielski/hasla/a/atheism.pdf
| editor-first = Andrzej
| editor-last = Maryniarczyk
| title = Universal Encyclopedia of Philosophy
| volume = 1
| publisher = Polish Thomas Aquinas Association
| accessdate = 2007-08-25}}
 
== بهرنۍ تړون ==
<!--Per Wikipedia conventions, there should be no more than 10–15 external links in this section. External links that don't merit inclusion here should either be removed altogether, moved to daughter articles, or incorporated into the article text as references.-->
{{sisterlinks}}
 
* {{dmoz|Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Atheism/|Atheism}} - Includes links to organizations and websites.
* [http://ffrf.org/ Freedom From Religion Foundation] - Foundation dedicated to protecting the separation of church and state.
* [http://www.positiveatheism.org/tochist.htm Positive atheism: Great Historical Writings] - Historical writing sorted by authors, contains a few items not in the Secular web library.
* [http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/ Religion & Ethics—Atheism] at [[bbc.co.uk]].
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/ Secular Web library] - Library of both historical and modern writings, a comprehensive online resource for freely available material on atheism.
* [http://www.agreeley.com/articles/hardcore.html The Demand for Religion] - A study on the demographics of Atheism by Wolfgang Jagodzinski (University of Cologne) and Andrew Greeley (University of Chicago and University of Arizona).
* [http://publicliterature.org/books/necessity_of_atheism/xaa.php ''The Necessity of Atheism''] - Complete work by Dr. D.M. Brooks.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
== سرچینې ==
* د څښتن تصور، لیکوال: ارشد محمود.
 
 
{{Atheism}}
{{belief systems}}
{{Philosophy navigation}}
{{Religion-related topics}}
{{د فلسفې سرليکونه}}
 
[[وېشنيزه:مذهب|مذهب]]
[[وېشنيزه:دهریت]]
[[وېشنيزه:Nontheism]]
[[وېشنيزه:د مذهب فلسفه]]
[[وېشنيزه:سکیولرېزم]]
[[وېشنيزه:Criticism of religion]]
[[وېشنيزه:Disengagement from religion]]
 
{{Link FA|de}}
"https://ps.wikipedia.org/wiki/اتيزم" نه اخيستل شوی