Unfortunately, there is not a singular answer to this question. You still have to choose which religion/sect you want to answer this question for you. You can't really delegate your morals to a deity because the choice of which interpretation of that deity's teachings you want to follow is still yours to make.
I understand what you mean, but I find that men who are able to truly humbly embrace that there's a higher power and purpose beyond their own whim and limited perception are a certain breed - and whichever framework they engage with this higher power through is a secondary choice.
EG - a devout Jew and a devout Hindu maybe very different in the practices they follow and the words they use, but they would not be very different in the kind of morality they follow, the kinds of family life they lead, etc.
The Japanese are very traditional and their traditions are rooted in religion.
Finland... something like 65% of the population is Lutheran, and that number was 90% in the 1980s. So it seems like the bulk of the current happy adults were raised in a religious environment even if they are now losing it a bit. Interesting to see how well they will persist in the future.
> something like 65% of the population is Lutheran
Most of those entered a church a handful times in their life, they aren't practicing Christians they don't believe in any god and don't care about it in their lives. Churches remains empty most of the time in Scandinavia, they are everywhere and welcome people but nobody goes there since they don't care.
The reason people registers with the church is that it gives them an place to marry in and it pays for their burial. It is a transaction and not a religion nowadays, the church owns all these huge buildings that exists everywhere, often the largest gathering place in town.
We even have practicing priests here who doesn't believe in God, for example 25% of priests doesn't believe that Jesus resurrected. Their job is to take care of the church and preach to the choir, not to believe in anything. There aren't enough believers to fill all the priest positions, that is how low our belief is.
Same in the UK, Church attendance has gotten a bit of a boost due to immigration but they are generally on the decline, and many are converted into houses or businesses.
I do think those religions are safe refuge for "atheist" tendencies and would agree with your point.
It's funny that I attended a Christian school when I lived in Japan as a high school student, but never spoke the language well enough to have any really deep spiritual discussions, sadly.
My understanding is that the Japanese are rather keen on following (or adopting) religious rites without being believers. A modern Japanese person may have a Shinto coming-of-age ceremony, marry at Christian church, and have a Buddhist funeral. All without really being Shinto, Christian or Buddhist in any meaningful sense of the word. In fact, I would argue this superficial syncretism happens precisely because of their lack of belief in any of it.
Sure, if you look for them you will find some devout Japanese, but they are very much in the minority. In every practical sense, the Japanese are exceptionally secular compared to e.g. the US.
I dont see the distinction between sect choice vs religious or not religious at all. If you're indoctrinated good and hard you're likely to be religious in the way the sect you were brought up in is. Choice elimination is the whole idea.
I hear this a lot, but I just don't agree. Being indoctrinated into a particular system of belief is very different from not being indoctrinated into any belief system at all.
Yes, certainly there are some atheists who are "religious" about it, and will vehemently teach their children that there is no possibility of any deities or afterlife, and that anyone who tries to tell them otherwise is mentally defective somehow. But I would agree that's just as tragic as indoctrinating someone into any religion, and that certainly isn't the only kind of atheist. But if you're going to be a part of your religion, and teach your children to believe in it, that's always going to be some degree of indoctrination.
I do really appreciate parents who are religious, but do their best to let their kids find their own way. I suspect that's a much rarer phenomenon than the atheist parents who do the same, though.
Let's also not get into an atheist vs. agnostic debate. My take on it is that if you are not agnostic, at best, you're a "religious atheist" who presents belief (that there are no deities) as fact, and that's just as dishonest as teaching someone the "fact" of a god and heaven and hell (or whatever).
My mother's mother was religious but her father was an atheist. My mother's religious but my father's an atheist. I'm an atheist.
From what I understand, you would say that my mother was indoctrinated and I wasn't, despite both of us growing up in nearly identical households with parents who had the same spread of opinions. This seems like an obvious double standard to me.
She's religious because her school had really good religious role models who taught Mendelian genetics and seemed like respectable adults, and I'm an atheist because I grew up in the Richard Dawkins vs creationism slapfight and didn't get a good impression of religious people during it. It's got nothing to do with indoctrination. Her religious education was arguably less of an indoctrination, since mine was administered by Access Ministries and wasn't particularly nuanced, while hers involved something pretty close to comparative theology.
I think arguably your story is somewhat exceptional. While there are certainly many households with mixed atheist/theist parents, I don't think that's all that common. Most common would be religious indoctrination from two religious parents.
I don't have a good handle on what's more common on the atheist side: indoctrination into the "be against religion at all costs" camp, or the "we don't believe in that stuff, but we're happy to answer questions and help you find answers and learn about religion if you want to" camp (the latter of which I certainly wouldn't classify as indoctrination).
My hope is that the latter type of atheist family is more common. But that may just be naive wishful thinking.
But I think your situation, with one atheist parent and one theist parent (and same for one set of grandparents), is likely less common than all three categories above. And I would also expect that your mother's situation, where she was introduced to religion during early school years and allowed to make up her own mind, isn't all that common either. But even then, I question how much she really got to make up her own mind. I suspect if she had attended a secular school with no religious role models, she may would have ended up an atheist.
I think the point I'm trying to get across is that I think agnostic atheism is generally born out of a lack of indoctrination. Both theism and strong atheism usually come from being indoctrinated into that sort of thing. The fact that your family is different -- and IMHO fairly rare -- doesn't really invalidate that. It just means there are exceptions, which... well... welcome to our messy universe, where precious little is absolute.
I think you're simplifying it too much. Kids -- and often adults -- follow the example set by other people without any particular attempt to indoctrinate them. I don't think you need to encourage uncritical belief from your kids when the majority of the people around them believe the same thing.
Not to downplay the fact that indoctrination does frequently happen. I just don't think it always happens, and exceptions seem to be quite common for the people around me, though I don't live in the US.
> My take on it is that if you are not agnostic, at best, you're a "religious atheist" who presents belief (that there are no deities) as fact
No, the main non-agnostic atheist belief is "The current religions are bullshit" which there is plenty of evidence for, so it is a much more rational belief than belief in any religion. Therefore it can't be classified as a religion since there are strong rational arguments behind it.
That's not my experience at all. The main non-agnostic atheism I've seen has been pretty hard to the "deities don't exist, full stop" side of the spectrum.
Also you don't need to be agnostic or non-agnostic, or even an atheist, to believe that the current religions are bullshit.
Until someone can prove that a deity exists, I don't have any need to go looking for one. Their absence in a world that cries out to them every day speaks volumes about their existence.
You succinctly explained how I feel. I was very religious earlier in life, giving my life and scant monies, raising my family to the same. Now, after evolving my views quite a bit due to firsthand observation and third hand research regarding the absolute bullshit religious pour on real marginalized communities, I'm apatheist (lean agnostic atheist). I legitimately don't care if there is a diety. If there is and they have need of my fealty, fine, but I'm not going to claim adherence nor follow belief to satisfy the whims of mortals claiming to be mouthpieces when a real deity has capacity to reveal themselves.
Rationality is defined as choices being able to be made that are both complete (all options under consideration can be understood) and transitive (if I choose A over B, and B over C, then I choose A over C).
Most often people exhibit bounded rationality, as "completeness" is a heavy cognitive burden and transitivity is hard on the margins.
Neither components of rationality require belief, and both recognize that choices (free will) can be made, suggesting more nuance to your argument is needed.
Everyone is raised with a system of beliefs, even if those beliefs are no about god. I was raised atheist (and hadn’t even heard the word “god” until I was about 4 or 5), but I definitely recognise that my moral beliefs have been strongly influenced by those of my parents, community and wider culture.
Fair. But I'm not sure it's fair to necessarily characterize all beliefs as "religious beliefs". To use your example, morality need have nothing to do with religion. Granted, I'm sure my morality was influenced by my religious upbringing. I've certainly re-examined a lot of my moral stances throughout my life (after deciding I was an atheist), but I'm sure I still have some biases because of the religious teaching I was forced to endure when I was young.
If there’s a deity, the odds that any particular religion gets it right are near 0.
One can simply observe vehement followers of conflicting religions to determine that someone must be wrong, and it’s more likely that everyone is wrong than not.
There's a bit in one of the early episodes of the TV series "The Good Place", where one of the afterlife people points out that pretty much every religion only gets a few percent right about what's going on (except for one random guy who somehow got 90-something % of it).
But yes, this is the thing that always gets me. It takes a mind-blowing amount of arrogance to believe that your religion -- out of all the thousands that currently or used to be practiced -- is the right one, and everyone else -- billions of people -- just absolutely must be wrong.
And if you don't have that arrogance (but are nonetheless religious), the only reasonable stance to take is that you believe there is a god, or many gods, or perhaps some sort of supernatural universal force; and that there is maybe (but maybe not) some kind of afterlife, or reincarnation system, or... who knows. But I meet precious few religious people who think like this; I guess most people who fall into this category would tick the "spiritual, but not affiliated with a religion" box.
Re-reading your comment, I'm actually confused now too. I suppose it's possible I clicked reply on the wrong comment? But I can't find a more appropriate parent comment, given a quick scan. Sorry about that.
Unfortunately, there is not a singular answer to this question. You still have to choose which religion/sect you want to answer this question for you. You can't really delegate your morals to a deity because the choice of which interpretation of that deity's teachings you want to follow is still yours to make.