Do you atheists want to manage society, everyone, mankind?

Do you atheists want to manage society, everyone, mankind, according to atheist beliefs and values, to bring mankind to happiness in this life — since you don’t look to any existence beyond the grave?

Posted: June 17th 2010

Dave Hitt www

Snark On…

I wanna be a boss
I wanna be a big boss
I wanna boss the word around
I wanna be the biggest boss that ever bossed the world around.


Snark Off…

Considering the endless evil propagated in the name of religion and other superstitions, I’d love to see a world where secularism was the rule and religion we put up with, but didn’t worry about.

Making the world a better place now, instead of devoting resources to propagating superstition, is the only approach that makes sense. Imagine if, for instance, all the wealth of the Vatican were used to improve the lives of downtrodden instead of providing a luxury pedophile hang-out. Now extrapolate that to all the resources wasted on religion. We could improve the world by an incredible degree very quickly.

But there isn’t any master plan to take over, at least I’ve never heard one discussed at the meetings.

Posted: July 17th 2010

See all questions answered by Dave Hitt

bitbutter www

Your implication that atheists may be more motivated to improve conditions during 'this life’, than some religious people are, makes sense. If a person doesn’t believe that misery in the here-and-now will be offset by a reward after death, they have more of an incentive to try to to improve their immediate conditions.

Some people believe that using the coercive power of the state to manage society is the best way to achieve improvement in our lives. Statism is an approach that both theists and atheists have advocated.

Others (myself included) believe that protecting the sovereignty of the individual is the most effective way to improve conditions for everyone. On this view, optimal social order is emergent rather than something imposed by social planners. Like statism, this stance includes both atheists and theists.

Posted: July 5th 2010

See all questions answered by bitbutter

Blaise www

Absolutely! The supreme council of our secret society meets in a magical underground cavern each week to discuss progress on the establishment of an iron-handed world dictatorship dedicated to our supreme ideals of not believing in something and freedom of thought.

Yes, that was sarcasm. It is intended to point out the logical inconsistency in the assumptions your question makes, namely that:

a) Atheists have a “We”, like a church or something, whose policies and activities we all agree to. This is rather laughable. If you ever find that organization, please let “us atheists” in on it!

b) Atheism is a religion/philosophy that has beliefs, values, or goals. Atheism means exactly and only that a person happens not to positively believe that a deity exists. It implies no position whatsoever on any moral or political topic.

c) Anyone is ever going to react well to a questioner who refers to them with a phrase like “You x”. A phrase like that inherently implies that in your narrow little mind you have grouped them together, and consider them outsiders or enemies. No one likes an elitist.

Posted: June 19th 2010

See all questions answered by Blaise

George Locke

This is a very silly question. What, do you think that we want a rationalist mind-police that punishes you for dirty, evil magical reasoning?

Of course I want to bring mankind happiness in this life, but “managing society” to bring about this goal, or any other, sounds like a sinister plot. I do believe in efforts to bring happiness to this world short of “managing society” (e.g. Lutheran World Relief).

Posted: June 18th 2010

See all questions answered by George Locke

brian thomson www

“Managing” sounds too much like hard work, to be honest. Someone in a position of power over people also has a responsibility to those people. Throughout history, churches etc. have learned this lesson, providing “government” and social services (e.g. food, medical care) in exchange for religious authority. These days, secular institutions in Western countries are fulfilling more and more of those functions, and (in my opinion) this is a factor in the decline of religion in those countries. If I wanted to boss people around, I would seek a public office of some sort – but I don’t, so I won’t.

Posted: June 18th 2010

See all questions answered by brian thomson


Most atheists and many theists are secularists who promote a secular society where there is a strong wall between state and religion. At the same time, citizens are allowed to decide for themselves to have whatever religious belief they want (providing they don’t break the law) or not to have any god belief.

The State not endorsing both religion and lack of god belief is important to prevent both theocracies and non-democratic atheist regimes from occurring.

Apparently, many religious believers are very happy having their beliefs, and therefore don’t really need assistance from atheists in order to happy!

Ensuring a secular state so each individual can decide for themselves to believe or not to believe in god is what most atheists and many theists accept as being the way to promote happiness. Encouraging vigorous debate and freedom of speech will allow the ideas to get out there. People can decide for themselves.

Posted: June 17th 2010

See all questions answered by logicel


Is your atheism a problem in your religious family or school?
Talk about it at the atheist nexus forum