Fighting theist tendencies is like fighting gravity.

Unless the state can provide a trusted communism, atheism is theology.

@Supra_Librix I don't see your connection between communism and atheism?

I wouldn't necessarily say that humans have "theistic" tendencies, but there is a strong drive to understand the nature of our world and existence. The creation of gods stemmed from trying to understand, and with very limited capacity, it was an easy excuse to just claim some magic beings were in control of anything that couldn't be explained. That is why you had grandiose stories like Ra being eaten by his mother Nut to explain why the sun disappeared at night, or Zeus throwing lightning bolts down during a storm. It's this strive for knowledge that allowed humans to become more resourceful, allowing us to understand more clearly. This is why many of these myths have been washed away, as we truly understand why the sun sets and how storms occur. We do not yet really know how the universe began, or how life began, but we will keep searching, and eventually remove the still-remaining myth that some magic being did it.

I wouldn't call atheism a theology. There really shouldn't even be a term for it, as there isn't a term for not believing in unicorns or not playing football. It's quite literally a lack of belief in any god or gods, and carries no additional tenets or philosophies or practices with it. There is only a term for it because it was so unfounded that anyone would reject the notion that there were magic beings controlling our lives.

As far as scalability, I would ask the same question of the popular theistic groups. I am by no means singling out Christianity, but I am more familiar with it, so I will use it as an example. When you have acceptance of slavery in the Bible, and then modern society deems it to be wrong, how does it scale to agree that it is "immoral" without negating itself? When the Bible has rules that a woman must marry her rapist, and society eventually deems that wrong, how does it scale?

I think if anything is unable to scale, it is religious dogma, as that is supposed to be absolute and unwavering. It cannot be wrong about something later on, or it will all crumble.

@JacksonNought The connection between communism and atheism is the dichotomy of philosophical thought:

Are we one with the universe? Or did one make the universe?

Neither one can be proven.

If you believe we are one with the universe, your thought process derives from that quantum state. Communism is an attempt to be all powerful in the physical domain. Peace and prosperity, everyone works for the common good. A noble pursuit.

The only problem with that is when that noble pursuit collides with the other horn of the philosophical dilemma: if one made the universe, then there exists a higher morality that we can only aspire to as humans.

From that point of view, communism is impossible, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that.

Morality is a function of technology. That's why it has changed since biblical times.

@Supra_Librix I am not entirely sure what beliefs you are following yourself, as sometimes you seem to champion a deistic worldview with absolute morality, and other times agreeing that morality is relative and subjective ("morality is a function of technology" ).

I would say we are one with the universe, as you say, really at a quantum state - since matter doesn't cease to exist. I would not prescribe any type of spiritual connection with it at all, though. And even if we were to say that one did make the universe, it is foolish to try and make claims as to the nature or intent of it: What if it was an accident? What if there is no sentience? What if it created the universe, but isn't trying to set morality on us? What if it is more like ancient religion, with multiple creators, and multiple ideas of right and wrong, and we need to figure out which one to follow?

I am still not sure why you are trying to compare Communism and Atheism - that is like apples and oranges, or more like apples and carrots. One is an economic and political system, the other is a philosophical or theological (as you claimed) system (or really a rejection of prescribed ones, as I claim).

You could have a Capitalistic society, or a Socialist, or Dictatorship, etc... you may have an opinion on which one is better to run a community, but they can all have pros and cons, and can all be corrupted by those in power. You are correct, Communism is near impossible - it is good on paper, but without proper motivation it can fall, and it will usually get corrupted by a dictator-like power struggle.

But, again, what has this to do with Atheism? It isn't a religion or way of life, it is a non-belief in something. It does not have a dogma that says life must be lived in a specific way, just that in most cases an Atheist will not subscribe to the dogma and lifestyle of a Theist. You can have a non-Communist Atheist society, look at Japan or Norway.

But I guess what it boils down to, is you seem to be saying that because Communism (everyone working only for the common good, honor system) never seems to work, that an Atheistic lifestyle (no absolute morality from a divine presence) also can't work? The fundamental difference here is what is "true"? There is no truth when it comes to economic/political systems - just what can work at the time. There is truth when it comes to the nature of the universe and a question of theology. If Christianity isn't true, should we all still pretend that it is just because you think society can't live without a belief in Jesus? Well, why shouldn't we all be Buddhists then? Or go back to Roman or Greek gods? Again, what you might think is a better society from a specific religion (and that is debatable, which is why there is so much fighting between religions) does not necessarily make it "true" - and that should really be what theology is about.

If we are really comparing politics and religion, then why shouldn't we all be under Monarchies or Dictatorships, as that is what more religions are?

@JacksonNought I created a philosophy based on logic and empirical evidence. It is antithetical to faith and amoral.

It's written in math, so strips all connotation from words.

The only prejudice is what the interpreter infers.

It functions like a straightedge to discover any flaw in any other philosophy.

It's perfect and impenetrable from my experience.

Please let me know if you ever find a flaw in the logic, if you do, you'd be the first.

@JacksonNought religion and government are impossible to distinguish if you can't understand the language that is used.

Order out of chaos.

Patterns of behavior, hierarchies and uniforms, rewards and punishments.

What happens in your mind is purely the value you place on them, impossible to prove, therefore discarded in any evaluation.

@JacksonNought that's the tie between atheism and communism.

Communism requires that the state be considered authoritative.

If you believe there is a higher power than the state, you are more likely to create quantum ripples in the spacetime of government.