Motivation

[darkstar3]

With Christmas and its supposed war approaching, and with the current crop of atheist billboards kicking the sticks found in so many asses, a great many claims are being made about atheists and atheism in general. I won't get into specifics with this OP, but if you've read any of the R/T posts lately or any of the GD posts regarding billboards you have seen many posters treat atheism as the motivation behind acts of cruelty, arrogance, intolerance, and indecency.

In this "festive" time, I'd like to more closely investigate the concept of motivation. Specifically, I would like to know how anyone suspects that the lack of belief in a deity can act as any kind of motivational idea or force.

For an example, let's take a look at the topic du jour: Billboards. What motivation do we suspect for these atheist billboards? If the billboards in question were meant to tell non-atheists what beliefs they should leave behind, then certainly the motivation behind these billboards would be atheism itself and nothing more. But if the billboards in question are meant to tell other atheists that they are not alone, not a freakshow, not anything being spewed about them by the religious right, then the motivation becomes something much more common: The human desire for inclusion, community, and support.

I see the motivation behind these billboards as being the exact motivation behind the gay pride parade: It's OK to be YOU, and other people should think that's OK too.

But while they are a good example here, let's not focus on just the billboards themselves. I'd like for everyone who reads this thread to ponder this question: How can the lack of a belief in a deity serve as motivation for anything by itself?

[patrice]

1. Motivation is ogranic. The organism's systems and functions don't cease because of atheism.

Maybe I don't understand your question, but are you saying that there has to be "something higher" to motivate? What about what we call beauty, or what about pleasure, what about fear? Maybe I don't get your question.

[darkstar3]

2. You did miss the point of the question, but your reply serves as an answer.

You show here that there are ALL SORTS of motivations, and atheism isn't one of them.

[patrice]

3. I'm not sure why not. The autonymy consequent to being diety-less, is quite motivating, isn't it?

[darkstar3]

5. Freeing, perhaps, but motivating?

What exactly would it motivate someone to do?

[patrice]

6. There are different kinds of motivators. The hardest "wired" ones are related to instincts and

are most relevant to most people.

We could speculate that autonomy, the ability to govern one's own actions, is motivating because it confirms the functionality required to survive. This would be why even a well kept slave is not happy.

[darkstar3]

7. But again, you're simply hitting on freedom.

What does freedom motivate you to do?

[patrice]

9. Obviously, since it IS freedom - anything I choose. Why don't you just make your point please.

Are you trying to get me to say that there is no motivation without "God"? You'll just have to go ahead and say it yourself, because I'm not going to.

[darkstar3]

10. That's exactly my point.

Freedom gives you the POWER to do whatever you like, but not a REASON to do so. For that you need a motivator, like any of the things you've mentioned.

I see atheism as freedom. I don't see it as a source of motivation. A belief in "God" can provide motivation for actions, but it is, as you pointed out above, only one in a million different motivators.

Am I not sayin' it right?

[patrice]

13. I function from the assumption that the relationship between us and "it" is justification

unto itself, in fact, us and it are parts of the same thing, so I don't think it necessary to add anything to "whatever you like". The liking IS the "reason" and it is the "reason" by virtue of the reality or truth of it, which I experience as liking. Liking reinforces/enriches who/what I/it was/is/will be and my experience has taught me not to take any of that for granted with my limitations, because there's a great deal about I/it that is more wondrous than any word(s) can encompass (with the possible exception of true poetry).

If it helps, you can substitute the word "God" in the foregoing for the word "it". Personally, I avoid that word because of all of the cultural, social, and conceptual limitations that particular word is freighted with. I wish not to MAKE a god of "God". I want to free "God" from all of our notions about it and live with that rather than with what I/you/he/she/we SAY about it.

Yes, most of what I am saying here has to do with words/language and its nature and its significantly inherent limitations.

No word is the same thing as that to which it ONLY refer and that's most especially true of whatever it is that is referred to by means of the word "God".

[patrice]

14. P.S. I am sorry if this is a tooooooo obtuse!!! I am a bit of a de-constructionist and there's

really no excuse for that that I could describe.

[darkstar3]

16. OK, let's assume for the moment that I followed what you're saying:

"Liking IS the 'reason'." OK, so freedom gives you the power, and liking gives you the reason. In keeping with our above conversation, I still say that atheism provides only freedom, not reason.

[KaoriMitsubishi]

43. Yes they are motivating.

I have talked with other atheists who until recently felt they were in a much smaller minority than they actually are, people who have been afraid to speak out for fear of reprisal. Seeing other atheists boldly advertize their godlessness has motivated many to be more open about themselves, to seek out likeminded individuals and groups and to stand up against religious oppression.

Of course atheist billboards also motivate religious delusionaries to show what their really made of.

http://www.google.com/search?q=atheist+billboard+vandalized

[LAGC]

4. What I want to know is...

How can I get one of these "atheist billboards" erected in my neck of the woods?

Goddess knows there are enough religious billboards along the freeway... it would be nice to have some diversity.

[Meshuga]

20. I also think these billboards would be better placed in other areas of the US

I've lived in New Jersey (NY metro) and atheism never seemed to be taboo at least in my circles. In the same way that it does not seem to be a big deal here in the DC Metro area.

[Sal316]

8. If atheism wasn't the motivation....

...then why do the NYC billboards say "You know it's a myth. This season, celebrate reason!"?

The wording, and in particular the "you know it's a myth" part seems to belie your hypothesis that they're simply there "to tell other atheists that they are not alone". It's a direct challenge to people of faith.


And, like I've said repeatedly, I find the opposing billboards to be just as off-putting.

[darkstar3]

11. But you, Sal, don't KNOW it's a myth.

So is it speaking to you or to someone else. Perhaps you should go back to the first thread on the billboard topic and read the statement from the organization president which said the billboard targets atheists.

Your counterexample falls flat. Do you have anything to refute the reasons I posted in the OP for the billboards?

[NashVegas]

12. Even If I DO Know It's a Myth ..

I'm about 90% certain we need myths, overall, as a society. As individuals, maybe not so much.

Look how well we took to Star Wars.

[patrice]

15. Myths articulate some important aspects of our relationships to "it".

As I said above, I personally don't think it necessary to add anything to that relationship, but historically people have added things, myths, anyway and it isn't that that stuff has no value to me, it is that they aren't necessary and if that weren't true, if the truth weren't independent of our myths about it, it wouldn't be the truth and myths wouldn't function as they do.

[darkstar3]

18. I don't have a problem with that.

I think myth can be useful, and as such I think it should be studied, but I also think myth can become dangerous when it is taken as any kind of absolute or moral truth.

[Sal316]

19. I did read.

..and although I appreciate his intent, the execution of his idea could have been done differently. In particular, the capitalization of the word KNOW, the inclusion of the Nativity scene, and calling it a myth is unnecessarily provocative.

As to your question "How can the lack of a belief in a deity serve as motivation for anything by itself?"

Simple, just as belief in a deity can lead those to discriminate against those who either don't believe or don't have the same faith, so can lack of belief.

There are cases here on DU where those who lack a belief in God, or whatever, view and openly address those who do believe as silly, irrational, unintelligent, etc.

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't always been the nicest or fairest person here....though I do try.

This doesn't have to be limited to faith. In any sort of ideological divide, one side can be motivated to look at the other as "less than" simply because they're different.

This can also go to your 'collection' analogy or taste in music or those who love the Twilight films.

[darkstar3]

21. It took you two posts here to bring up disrimination.

Not surprising when you consider how many times you've attempted to claim persecution in this forum.

What makes you think that bigotry or simple discrimination is rooted solely in a difference of opinion?

[darkstar3]

17. Let's try an analogy.

Thomas T. Tappington has never really cared for collections. Stamps, rocks, baseball cards, the type of collection doesn't really matter because Thomas just isn't interested in collecting. What, if anything, could Thomas' lack of interest in collections motivate him to do?

[Goblinmonger]

22. Oppress Christians

:evilgrin:

[darkstar3]

23. Now, now...

BTW, I really only posted here to say the new sig is awesome. I had forgotten about that one...

[Goblinmonger]

24. Thanks

It is still one of my favorites, too

[rug]

26. Put a billboard up over the Holland Tunnel proclaiming stamp collectors are deluded.

[darkstar3]

27. Why?

How do you get from "I just don't care from collections" to "stamp collectors are deluded"? There's a set of steps there that you're missing.

[ZombieHorde]

25. Recommended. nt

[darkstar3]

28. Shameless kick, and 2 restated questions.

There were two questions raised earlier in subthread discussions with my detractors, but nobody bothered to even try and answer them. I'd like to restate them here, because I really do want answers to these questions.

1. (From #21) What makes you think that bigotry or simple discrimination is rooted solely in a difference of opinion?
2. (From #27) How do you get from "I just don't care {for} collections" to "stamp collectors are deluded"? There's a set of steps there that you're missing.

Now it's true that these questions were directed to Sal and rug, respectively, but if anyone has a response at all I'd be happy to read it. I'd also be happy to read any answers to the original question raised in the OP, assuming of course that anyone can think of one.

[trotsky]

29. I can answer both questions.

Any statement that is not glowing admiration for a believer's particular religion is automatically hate speech / bigotry / a personal attack.

If you accept that as true, then both of the statements you are asking about directly flow from the logic.

[AlecBGreen]

30. Ill take a shot

"What makes you think that bigotry or simple discrimination is rooted solely in a difference of opinion?"

I think bigotry is based on a combination of ignorance and fear. I also think fear itself can be traced back to ignorance, so bigotry is rooted in a lack of understanding and (therefore) a fear of the unknown. I think some bigots might hate others because they fear the strangeness of their ideas or they feel the security of their own beliefs is in danger. Even so, I wouldnt argue that bigotry or discrimination is rooted solely in differences of opinion.

Only have time for a short response so Ill come back to the original question after work.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AlecBGreen]

32. It can motivate

"I would like to know how anyone suspects that the lack of belief in a deity can act as any kind of motivational idea or force."

There are people who believe there is no God. Some of these people think believers are wrong, have a faulty grasp of reality, etc. Their desire to correct supposed ignorance motivates them to try to sway people to drop their belief.

Mentally, I think it goes like this: "Man I cant believe people believe in God, what are they thinking?! Look how much pain and suffering is happening in the world because of their ignorance and superstition. If only they could see the light and realize there is no God. I need to do something about this..."

I see motivation there. I dont think its a bad thing.

[cleanhippie]

33. I do not know any of those people.

Those people being ones who "believe there is no god." Who are they? Where are they? What are they called? How do you identify them?

Now, OTOH, I do know many, many people who "do not believe in a god." Those people are called atheists.


In your example, is the lack of belief the motivating factor or is the dislike of the insanity of religion the motivating factor?

[darkstar3]

34. Aside from the fact that you're making more than one obvious assumption,

there is a HUGE problem with what you're trying to say here: Atheism isn't a conclusion that you can force people into, and every single atheist I have ever talked to knows that. As Alan Rickman's character in Dogma says...

"Would you...COULD you have believed me? It was something you had to come to gradually."

There is nothing for me, an atheist, to do about the number of people who believe in gods. There are, however, things I can do to make people realize that I'm not an evil, child-eating, goat-fucking, baby-sacrificing, melodramatic villain just because I don't believe in their version of god. Now, in THAT situation, would you call atheism the motivation for my actions, or the desire to avoid such awful caricatures?

[AlecBGreen]

35. What assumption am I making?

Is it here (There are people who believe there is no God. Some of these people think believers are wrong, have a faulty grasp of reality, etc. Their desire to correct supposed ignorance motivates them to try to sway people to drop their belief.) because that is about as nonconfrontational, everybody-can-agree statement as I could make.

Is it the mental conversation? That IS an assumption but I think a fair one.

"there is a HUGE problem with what you're trying to say here: Atheism isn't a conclusion that you can force people into" I dont think it IS something you can force people into, beyond extra-ordinary situations like torture. To try to get someone else to drop their belief takes dialogue, not coercion. I feel the same way about getting people to believe in God. If it cant be done with discussion and it requires force, youre doing it wrong.

I dont think you're "an evil, child-eating, goat-fucking, baby-sacrificing, melodramatic villain" but then again you havent introduced yourself in my other thread so I really cant be sure... :P J/K

I think we humans want to share WHO WE REALLY ARE with other people because we hate misperceptions. We hate to be misunderstood (at least I do. I mean REALLY cant stand it...). You ARE NOT a bad person because you are an atheist (you are, right?) and you want believers to see that. So, I think its a combination of the two. Your motivation is to avoid awful cariactures based upon your disbelief. If you put a gun to my head and said PICK ONE ALEC! Id say its the former; the motivation comes from desiring to not be labelled & misunderstood.

[darkstar3]

36. Right in one quote.

I count 2 assumptions and a contradiction in the quote you put in parentheses here.

First, you need to point to someone who actively believes there is no God. (active belief vs. simple rejection may seem to semantic to you, but the difference is large and important.)
Then, you need to realize that this person IS a believer. (contradicting your second sentence a bit.)
Finally, you need to find someone who fits your first description who actively tries to dissuade people from believing in God.

Now you might think that atheist posters here actively try to dissuade people from believing in God every damn day, but do they? Speaking for myself, I find that I spend most of my time in R/T attempting to dispel misconceptions and outright falsehoods leveled against atheists and atheism in general. Other posts I find here from known atheists generally argue theological points from certain religions, which is certainly not an action specific to atheists. Finally, while I haven't been here since the inception of the board, I can tell you that I've never seen a thread which can be summarized as "ATTENTION BELIEVERS! THERE IS NO GOD AND I CAN TELL YOU WHY!"

Now, I wish to clarify something. So far, you have tried to answer my question in the OP twice, but you haven't quite done so. Each time you have tried to show how atheism can motivate people to do things, you combine it with something else.

In post #32, it was atheism combined with arrogance and a very human, albeit misguided and assumed, desire to reduce suffering. (I decided to let the conflation of atheism and arrogance go in the vein of productive discussion. You should be cautious in the future, though, because little assumptions like that can derail things pretty fast here.)

In post #35, it was atheism combined with the very human desire to avoid being misunderstood, vilified, and marginalized.

Neither one of these, however, answers the question in the OP. How can atheism, or the lack of belief in any gods, motivate people on its own?

[AlecBGreen]

37. reply

Here's what I orginally said (Im putting it here so I dont have to keep hitting the back button while I type my reply to you) "There are people who believe there is no God. Some of these people think believers are wrong, have a faulty grasp of reality, etc. Their desire to correct supposed ignorance motivates them to try to sway people to drop their belief."

Your points: "First, you need to point to someone who actively believes there is no God. (active belief vs. simple rejection may seem to semantic to you, but the difference is large and important.)" To me, the two are the same. To me, active disbelief is the same as simple rejection. Can you explain how they are different? Im not doing this as a challenge; Im trying to see the difference b/w them from your perspective.

"Then, you need to realize that this person IS a believer. (contradicting your second sentence a bit.)" Im confused. When I said 'some of these people' I was referring to the believe-there-is-no-God atheists in sentence one; they (the atheists) think the believers (theists/Christians) are wrong.

"Finally, you need to find someone who fits your first description who actively tries to dissuade people from believing in God" From my POV anyone who mocks my belief and mocks me for believing is trying in their own way to change me. To me, anyone who says "There is no such thing as God" thinks I should not believe that. If they had no problem with my belief, why would they say such things? Thats how I take it.

The motivation question: we must first assume that their can be PURE MOTIVES of any kind. Do I do things for my wife TOTALLY out of love or is it because I also want to strengthen our marriage, build a closer relationship, score brownie points, etc? I think 'pure motives' are next to impossible, especially for me. This is why Christ urged his followers: "When you give, dont let your right hand know what your left hand is doing." Do things for the 'pure' reasons (love, compassion, altruism) and dont do good things for the positive benefits you might recieve (praise, recognition, chips to cash in). I think thats the right way to live. Now back to your question: does atheism motivate? If it is possible to separate itself from all other considerations, no, it does not. Thats the best answer I can give. NO, but conditionally.

[darkstar3]

38. Subtlety. Sometimes it is difficult to see.

You say you see no difference between active belief and simple rejection. Ponder these two statements for a moment:

1. I believe there can't possibly be any gods.
2. I lack belief.

Statement number 1 is an example of active belief. It is an assertion based on faith. It is the position that so many theists wish to push upon atheists so that they can then refer to atheism as a religion or an irrationality. Statement number 2 is an example of a simple rejection. It makes no claims about the universe as it stands, and serves only to illustrate that the claimant does not share your belief. It is the actual, logical position of atheism. The difference may be subtle, but as it is essentially the difference between belief and non-belief it is more vast than the Pacific Ocean.

So someone who calls themselves an atheist doesn't necessarily fit into your "believe there is no God" group. In fact, anyone who DID fit into that group would, themselves, be a believer, or a person who espouses an active belief. So there you have an assumption and a contradiction in terms.

Now, I'm afraid here that I have to say something harsh. I'd like for you first to re-read this sentence from your last post:

If they had no problem with my belief, why would they say such things?

This statement is an example of heavily ingrained privilege. In this case, the privilege of being a white, straight, Christian male in the USA. What makes you think that someone else's expression of their own ideas is an attempt to sway you? Privilege, pure and simple.

Now, as for motivation, you're starting to see my point from the OP. Certain frequent posters on this board (who shall remain nameless) take perverse joy in laying all sorts of atrocities at the feet of atheism, and as we can see here, they have no case. It is becoming clear in this thread what I have been trying to say since my first foray into those hate-fests: Atheism is not a motivator.

[AlecBGreen]

40. I just dont see it that way Darkstar

If they had no problem with my belief, why would they say such things?

This statement is an example of heavily ingrained privilege. In this case, the privilege of being a white, straight, Christian male in the USA. What makes you think that someone else's expression of their own ideas is an attempt to sway you? Privilege, pure and simple.

I do not argue that I am the product of privilege, I do not argue that I am blind to many of its effects for most of the time. Where I disagree is that I think sometimes people say things NOT to inform me of their belief, but to GET ME TO BELIEVE what they believe. When someone says (and its been said to me before) "God doesnt exist, and heres why..." the feeling I get is that they think I am wrong, I should recognize the strength of their argument and I should change my belief to match theirs. That does not happen all the time; I dont feel that way with you. Its just how I perceive some of the conversations I've had re: God.

[darkstar3]

41. So now we've gone from "anyone" to "some".

I'm hearing a player from The Frantics in my head..."You gain wisdom, child."

You've hit on an important point here, and I would like to expound on it. Your feelings are neither valid, nor invalid. They simply are. Therefore, if you feel that your faith is under attack (melodramatic but concise) in any conversation, you should feel that you have the right to exit said conversation. But before you say your goodbyes in any situation like that, allow me to suggest that you try to see the debate from the other side of the coin. It is possible, especially here in R/T, that while you feel someone's intent may be to "convert" you, they may feel very differently about what they've posted. Speaking for myself and for a few other posters here that I know, sometimes the intent of a post is not to respond directly to something, but to provide a complete reading narrative for those who may come after us. Many people in this life are confused about what they believe, and if they come here looking for any kind of clarity it would be nice for them to find it in concise arguments and refutations.

(The peanut gallery can stop guffawing now.)

Of course no one, especially here, is above knee-jerks and bickering. Not even me. Just look at some of the exchanges I've had with, shall we say, some of the more provocative believers in this forum. ;)

[AlecBGreen]

42. I stand by that

"From my POV anyone who mocks my belief and mocks me for believing is trying in their own way to change me." Thats just the way I feel. Perhaps their motive isnt what I ascribe but thats how I perceive it and probably always will.

I agree with what you say here: "It is possible, especially here in R/T, that while you feel someone's intent may be to "convert" you, they may feel very differently about what they've posted."

"Many people in this life are confused about what they believe, and if they come here looking for any kind of clarity it would be nice for them to find it in concise arguments and refutations." I agree and Im glad you said that. Thats part of the reason Im here too, to engage in discussion and share my perception of whats going on here in this world.

Unlike you, I am completely above knee-jerks and bickering; if you say otherwise so-help-me Ill smack you in your atheist gob!!1! You got a problem with that? :P

[rrneck]

39. Well said. Sorry it's too late to rec. nt