Some people may notice I am kind of a different kind of atheist this is because I am an axiological atheist (value theory or value science atheist).
Remember when someone announces that they are an atheist; listeners may assume there is only one type of atheist available, when really she is a different type of atheist.
As an axiological atheist Axiology is a large motivation and it is value theory which is a lens to view and valuize or value judge worth or what is worthy as well as what is good or bad of greater or lesser value.
To read more on value theory check it out online at: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (value theory) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/value-theory/
As an axiological atheist, I see intrinsic value in people and want them to see that value in themselves as well as others. Doing such would never allow for a god who devalues you and asks you to devalue others.
Similarly to follow such a high standard I too must value myself, value others, and strive to help other people value others. I strive to be as strong in devaluing myths and lies as I am in valuing the person who may hold them.
Value to an axiologist has multiple realms/categories and meanings going from internal value, external value, and systemic or global value.
Likewise, there can be value distinctions differentiating, for example, between instrumental value (being good for some purpose) and technical value (being good at doing something) or between contributory value (being good as part of a whole) and final value (being good as a whole).
To read more on axiology check it out online at: Encyclopedia Britannica (axiology) http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/46184/axiology
To read more on the science of axiology check it out online at: Robert S. Hartman Institute (applications of axiology) http://www.hartmaninstitute.org/applicationsofaxiology/
Axiological Atheism is a type of atheist philosophy it can be thought of as similar to existentialism and Humanism.
Here is a short explanation from Wikipedia on axiological atheism:
Axiological, or constructive, atheism rejects the existence of gods in favor of a “higher absolute”, such as humanity. 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 and Freud used this argument to convey messages of liberation, full-development, and unfettered happiness.
One of the most common criticisms of atheism has been to the contrary—that denying the existence of a god leads to moral relativism, leaving one with no moral or ethical foundation, or renders life meaningless and miserable. Blaise Pascal argued this view in his Pensées.
To read more on atheist philosophies check it out online at: Wikipedia (Atheism – Atheist philosophies) http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
Axiological Atheism would affirm rejecting gods does not have to lead to moral nihilism or moral relativism but can allow and axiological atheism supports a kind of atheistic objective morality foundation. Also axiological atheism supports that life has value and meaning as well as can be rich and meaningful.
To read more on objective morality check it out online at: Strong Atheism (case for objective morality) http://www.strongatheism.net/library/philosophy/case_for_objective_morality/
Some may not like what I am but your lack of agreement to my educated philosophical unbelief stance does little to either diminish its reticence or truth. Atheism is just the beginning; now it’s time to solve the harder questions. There are many different kinds of atheism but to offer a cleaner rough view here are a few organized common categories, 7 sets will be offered some kinds of atheism can be combined in a person, and some cannot.
1. Difference in Knowledge
2. Difference in Affirmation
3. Difference in Scope
4. Difference in the Assessed Rationality of Theism
5. Difference in Openness
6. Difference in Action
7. Difference in Bent on Religiosity
To read more on this check it out online at: Commonsense Atheism (17 Kinds of Atheism) http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=6487
Some may say it’s all atheism why complicate the issue? To say why complicate you’re thinking is paramount to saying “why be educated at all in your unbelief?”“Why defend it with reasoning or evidence?” “Why strive to be more informed on the untruth of religion or gods?” That can’t truly be something we who are critical thinkers really support to champion a uninformed atheist position just because it is simpler?
I support nonbelievers just calling themselves atheist. I am not saying my way of being an axiological atheist is the only or even the best way for all other nonbelievers, in fact I only am only mentioned me my philosophical atheist stance and wanted to quickly explain how, why and in what way I disbelieve. I am not the thought police nor would I ever support that or let others be thought police to me. As they say atheism is not a group movement or a cult like religion so to me there is no one correct liable all should or must follow. Just like how some atheists prefer bright, freethinker, skeptic, rationalist, secular humanist, etc. whatever xyz. We who value critical thinking must hold reason above opinions. So I say go you I value people being authentic in whatever way they see right to define their personal disbelief.
Atheists come in a variety of shapes, colors, beliefs, convictions, and backgrounds. To read more on this check it out online at: American Atheists (What is Atheism?) http://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Atheists, as a whole, are not a unified group, so accusation that “atheists” are doing x, y and z hold little water. In fact, a disaffection with organized religion, and the potential for groupthink, is what causes many believers to abandon faith and come out as atheists. It doesn’t follow that such individuals would happily join another organized group. Debate within the atheistic community is robust – debates even about whether there is even an “atheistic community” at all, for instance – and the fact that this debate exists presupposes no dogmatic mandate from an organized group. It does follow from this lack of organization that there is no atheist equivalent of the Bible, Koran, or other holy text. There are, of course, atheist writings, but one does not need to adhere to opinions held by Friedrich Nietzsche, Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens to be considered an atheist. Some atheists will actively oppose what these kind of authors do and say.
To read more on this check it out online at: Rational wiki (Atheism) http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism
Some argue strong atheists add some dictator killed people so we should not have hard atheist stances. I reject this as flawed thinking most claimed atheist killers did not kill for atheism but where killers who may have rejected the concept of gods.
Likewise in two other ways I will reject this reasoning first my hard stance is humanitarian such as the hate of injustice is the motivation for justice. The other being even if atheists had killed it means little as it would be only the people involved.
In a since all atheists are an island of personal persuasion, belief, and accountability. As such atheism is not an actual group or sect like a religion so we have no affiliations to the action or philosophical thinking of any other nonbelievers.
By Damien Marie AtHope