. . .i believe that we’ll just be somewhere else, still evolving. That’s just the idea i’ve got in my head that feels right. My belief in the soul is because i feel i have a soul to question if i have a soul or not.

I think some atheists don’t necessarily help themselves when they give the impression that being an atheist is only about logic and reason and science. How and how deeply one feels, and encounters life in terms of feeling and desire, may channel one’s views in directions that are not stereotypically ‘atheist.’

For better or worse, we have feelings, we imagine, we inquire about what life means. Logic and reason are of limited meaning, are they not? They serve us, yet they may mean nothing else. Still, we don’t denigrate them for this reason. Isn’t it a denial of our own nature to subordinate feeling to reason, as if it were something of which we ought to be ashamed? We act as much by irrational directives as by rational ones. Sometimes our feelings are true and our reason is not. If the intuitions of our ancestors often led them astray because they were lacking, should we never trust our own? I can recognize the desire for truth, even when one has gone hunting for it in the wrong forest.

Can we not admit that sometimes it is difficult to recognize when we have subordinated our reason to our desire and our feeling? Desire has often triumphed over reason. This is not an indictment of desire, or of reason, but of nature. Even so, such an indictment is meaningless, for who will judge it?

But Atheism doesn’t talk about belief in souls, or the easter bunny, or an honest government – it’s about belief in God.

Or gods. It’s also unnecessary to capitalize “atheism”. Yeah, I keep harping on that, but someone’s got to.

Something Jonathan said i think really summed it up:
My answer: Yeah, people can believe literally crap they want so long as they don’t need evidence to support it. For instance, I believe I’m funny.

Here’s my thought – i can believe in souls, something that is, just like the idea of god, impossible to prove or disprove. Just like i can believe in any idea or opinion that is similarly moot. But maintaining my disbelief in god, after reading all these great replies, i believe still fits into the definition, simple as it is, of Atheism. It’s not what ELSE i believe in that matters in this question, it’s what i DON’T believe in.

As for POOF…. Sure, evidence of our actions here and genetics (if we reproduce) will last for a while, but i was also thinking long-term, when this solar system burns away into nothing, i believe that we’ll just be somewhere else, still evolving. That’s just the idea i’ve got in my head that feels right. My belief in the soul is because i feel i have a soul to question if i have a soul or not. Kind of like an orgasm – you know if you’re having one, and if you don’t, then you’re not. I do recognize that believers in god can argue the same exact thing – they “feel” that god exists, so god exists. But Atheism doesn’t talk about belief in souls, or the easter bunny, or an honest government – it’s about belief in God.

Thanks again to everyone for twisting my mind on this, and adding their voices to the discussion! We’re all lucky to have such a great place to compare and contrast ideas. Thanks, Hemant!

I believe that in the past, atheism was an accusation of deviating from orthodoxy, rather than an accusation of not believing in a god

Very true. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, was once accused of (and burned to death for) atheism for not accepting the divinity of the Roman Emperor. Then again “gay” used to mean “happy”.

I still feel that atheism carries with it the assumption of naturalism.

That’s fine, your assumptions should be challenged. If someone wants to call themselves an atheist and believe in ghosts, souls, cosmic teapots and all sorts of stuff that I think are silly then they aren’t wrong to do so. They’re not right either but I’m not going to take away their atheist membership card and free hat because I disagree with a secondary issue. The free hat is awesome.

Based on Chion’s comment above, it’s safe to say he is the one Hemant quoted in his post. Perhaps you missed his post as he’s the one who used “POOF.”

My own comments were not directed at you at all. When I started my comment yours hadn’t been posted yet and neither had Linda’s for that matter.

we’re just fertilizer then. Sad, but true.

Well, that’s the oversimplification as it is neither sad nor completely true.

Unless of course you’re not just referring to a generation or two from now, but thousands or millions of years from now. In a cosmic sense, we’re all completely insignificant. Really coming to terms with our insignificance is what can enable us to realize the limited extent we can be significant. This is largely where my worldview comes from and part of the reason why the “irreconcilable contradiction” you alluded to earlier isn’t an issue for me.

Of course, I’m not saying that I am right or that you are wrong. All I am saying is that in the absence of beliefs, values are what shapes a worldview. In the context of this discussion, I’m trying to see if Chion’s worldview is based on his beliefs or his values as I think that will help him answer his own questions.

I think we pass on whatever we can to the people that we touch throughout our lives, including our family, friends, and everyone we come in contact with.

Reminded me of this Woody Allen quote:
“I don’t want to live on in the hearts of my countrymen; I want to live on in my apartment.”