A Brief History of Disbelief

August 6, 2007 4:16 PM

A Brief History of Disbelief -- 2, 3, 4. An excellent documentary on the history of Atheism from the ancient Greeks to today. Wonderful food for thought whether you are a believer or not.
posted by empath (62 comments total)

This is very old stuff.
posted by homodigitalis at 4:45 PM on August 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

Excellent! thanks. Looking forward to learning some history-until-recently-occulted.

Consider the fascinating power of attempts -- sometimes completely unconscious -- to extinguish behavior by silencing it and neglecting it. And then there are the lead "silencers" who call themselves professionals, dabbling daily in "common sense".

Strange creatures, we.
posted by Twang at 4:53 PM on August 6, 2007

This is very old stuff.

Well, the FPP did say it starts with the ancient Greeks...
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:55 PM on August 6, 2007 [2 favorites]

Richard Dawkins gave me some golden tablets.
posted by orthogonality at 4:55 PM on August 6, 2007 [3 favorites]

I CAN'T BELIEVE I ATE THE WHOLE WEB!!!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:56 PM on August 6, 2007

They describe how Jesus evolved from a fish, and came to America.
posted by orthogonality at 4:56 PM on August 6, 2007 [9 favorites]

Interesting.
posted by jeffamaphone at 5:05 PM on August 6, 2007

"A Brief History of Disbelief" got some protest before it aired on PBS. Here is me arguing with a critic of the show.
posted by McLir at 5:22 PM on August 6, 2007 [3 favorites]

"There will be no blurred, slow-motion shots of people making leaps of faith"

Hehe - me likes.
posted by AwkwardPause at 5:44 PM on August 6, 2007

Old stuff (2 years)?? Interestingly, no DVD shows up at my library ... or at Amazon for that matter.

I'm sure there's no conspiracy.
posted by Twang at 5:54 PM on August 6, 2007

I think he keeps using "beg the question" incorrectly.
posted by jeffamaphone at 6:00 PM on August 6, 2007

Richard Dawkins gave me some golden tablets.

Lucky dog. He sodomized me with a Jesus dildo.
posted by bardic at 6:30 PM on August 6, 2007

Excellent stuff. Miller explores the subject thoughtfully and thoroughly, without the shrillness and cheap shots of Dawkins or Hitchens. What's with all the derails, you assholes?
posted by nowonmai at 6:38 PM on August 6, 2007

Good stuff.
posted by travis vocino at 6:40 PM on August 6, 2007

Thanks for the links. The BBC page about the series lists only three parts: your fourth link is the same episode as the second.
posted by St Urbain's Horseman at 7:31 PM on August 6, 2007

I'm always a little bothered about describing a-theism as a disbelief since the term implies some sort of action as in doubting the truth of something.

For me, I don't not believe in a god but rather that I've never encountered any reason to think that there's a god.

It's like a purple elephant. There's no naturally occuring elephant that happens to be purple. It's not like there's a purple elephant in the room and I'm disbelieving my senses.
posted by porpoise at 7:36 PM on August 6, 2007 [5 favorites]

oh.. no wonder i couldn't find the 4th part on google video :)
posted by empath at 7:57 PM on August 6, 2007

No wonder indeed. ;-)
posted by St Urbain's Horseman at 8:12 PM on August 6, 2007

Made favorite so I can check it out when I have more time. This is a subject that has been on my mind lately. Thanks for the post!
posted by snsranch at 8:21 PM on August 6, 2007 [1 favorite]

porpoise,
There's no naturally occuring elephant that happens to be purple.
I think perhaps you're misinterpreting the "disbelief" thing. Most people grow up in societies that have some form of religious belief (I'd say all, but maybe there's some predominantly atheistic societies I don't know about). So for most atheists, you are raised in an environment that teaches something, and then eventually you say, "Wait, this doesn't quite add up," and move on from there to question the beliefs. In this way atheism can be said to be a "disbelief" not from a natural state but from a cultural environment of belief.

On topic: Thanks, empath, fascinating videos. It seems like even religious people should appreciate such a well-done history lesson, if only for the simple "know thine enemy" reason.
posted by Sangermaine at 8:30 PM on August 6, 2007

Good point Sangermaine - I guess there are also people who believe strongly that all drugs are evil, period, or that the most wealthy people in the country deserve/are-allowed-to-be taxed less than those less affluant.

I guess I disbelief those people's beliefs based on evidence against those beliefs (so long as those ends are benefitting the social whole).

/wishes for a day when "In this way atheism can be said to be a "disbelief" not from a natural state but from a cultural environment of belief." does not apply
posted by porpoise at 9:00 PM on August 6, 2007

MetaFilter seems rife with religious intolerance and disinformation under the guise of intelligent conversation.
posted by sanko at 9:01 PM on August 6, 2007

Jonathan Miller is a national treasure.
posted by Abiezer at 9:47 PM on August 6, 2007

watched the whole lot on my video iPod.

"Brief" wasn't the adjective that leapt to mind...
posted by marvin at 11:10 PM on August 6, 2007

From the end of the first episode:

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side.--Aristotle
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 11:36 PM on August 6, 2007

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.--Seneca
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 11:40 PM on August 6, 2007 [4 favorites]

perhaps it's the other way around and intelligent conversation leads to religious intolerance? who knows?

Sangermaine's point is a good one. however, i grew up among disbelievers, and never had any sense of what it felt like to believe even though i grew up in a supposedly christian society.

even at the tender age of four or five, i could not be prevailed upon to understand what it meant to subjugate one's self to a character in a fable-book in my babysitter's attic, or why one would do so. i just could not make out a connection between those stories and the reality that i observed. in fact, if memory serves, i found the earnestness of many believers quite frightening, and their stories spectacularly boring.
posted by klanawa at 11:55 PM on August 6, 2007

I think we can safely say that lack of belief preceded belief.
posted by jeblis at 12:12 AM on August 7, 2007 [2 favorites]

I think we can safely say that lack of belief preceded belief.

Watching animals during a thunderstorm makes me question this idea. Of course, at one time the earth was molten. Does lava believe?
posted by telstar at 12:22 AM on August 7, 2007

Religion seems rife with intolerance and disinformation under the guise of intelligent design. (fixed it for you).
posted by Merlin at 12:38 AM on August 7, 2007

MetaFilter seems rife with religious intolerance and disinformation under the guise of intelligent conversation.

Mefi does tend towards the atheistic/agnostic end of the spectrum because it is full of clever geeks who tend to be sceptics, but I actually think it’s got a lot more balanced lately.

Jonathan Miller is lovely and this was a nice series – excellent find.
posted by low_horrible_immoral at 1:36 AM on August 7, 2007

An even briefer history of disbelief:

In the beginning there was nothing, etc, etc....
posted by JeNeSaisQuoi at 2:21 AM on August 7, 2007

I actually think it’s got a lot more balanced lately.

I'm not sure balance is a good thing. A silly idea is silly regardless of whether or not it has the magical term "religion" attached to it. When we go to extreme lengths to not hurt someone's feelings, we fail to enforce the social norm that ideas should be reasonable. Taken to the extreme, the irrational beliefs lead to all sorts of irrational actions.

When confronted with an irrational argument (from emotion usually) it's often pointless to treat it with reason. After all the idea wasn't based upon reason to begin with. Mockery is a surprisingly effective social norming mechanism here; if only it was used more often...
posted by jeblis at 2:42 AM on August 7, 2007 [2 favorites]

One thing that people don't understand about athiests is that we want to believe in God, that we have an immortal soul and that there is an afterlife. We just don't have a single shred of evidence. And you have to draw the line where there's a lack of evidence or else you open up the doors for believing in all kinds of superstitious nonsense.
posted by disgruntled at 4:10 AM on August 7, 2007 [1 favorite]

@disgruntle: "One thing that people don't understand about athiests is that we want to believe in God"

Really?

Atheism, as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the nonexistence of gods[1] or rejects theism.
posted by homodigitalis at 4:43 AM on August 7, 2007

Since the series is already old and so called religious tolerance is called in - let me post some equally old and boring arguments against religion (by Pat Condell):

What have I got against religion?

Why does faith deserve respect?

God bless atheism


posted by homodigitalis at 4:47 AM on August 7, 2007

Hey McLlr, good going on callin gout that right wing piece of nastiness named Janice Crouse. You nailed her good but you were too polite by half given her rudeness.

So in case she ever googles herself: Janice Crouse, you are a raging motherfucking idiot.
posted by spitbull at 5:35 AM on August 7, 2007

Really, homodigitalis. This atheist would just love to believe in God. How gosh darned nice it would be to have an omnipotent benevolent divine force looking out for you at all times, to have a simple method of determining what's right and wrong, and to know that death is not the end, but merely the beginning of an immortal afterlife in paradise. Unfortunately, something being good and nice and comforting has no bearing on whether it's true.
posted by hoverboards don't work on water at 5:54 AM on August 7, 2007

This seems like a fine series, but (and I say this as an atheist) I'm never sure what the point is. The saying is, "You cannot reason someone out of a belief he was not reasoned into." I can't imagine any theists will be "converted" by something like this. Some may have their attitudes towards atheists changed (which would be nice) but again, from my experience alone, those people were never really that much of an issue in the first place.

In short, the people who most need to see this won't, and if they somehow do, it's highly doubtful it'll change anything. So ultimately it comes down to atheists going "Yay us! We're so smart!"
posted by Legomancer at 6:11 AM on August 7, 2007

@hoverboards don't work on water:

Well, Freud diagnosed judeo-christian religion as a form of Über-father worship - basically hoping for that immortal parent thats always there and fixes your life, when you are to stupid or ignorant to own your own shit.

IMHO part of really claiming once full potential and growing up is to stop being a 'inner child' and stop hoping that all these mental and spiritual backdoors exist.

Yes, there are many immature people out there, who love the idea of superchristydaddymomangelwhatsoever. Some are so called religious people, some are so called atheists.

I really have to think of Carl Sagan here or Richard Dawkins - who have shown us many times the wonders, beauty and fascination of the natural Universe - no batteries or gods needed.

Jonathan Miller has shown us in his documentary that atheism is as much linked to general education and cultural development as science and more liberal societies.

The problem with religion (and often politics) is that false hopes, myths and fairy tales are translated into rules, restrictions and seggregation. We humans have often an addiction to improbable stories instead of accepting unspeakable truths and facts.

Many people rather pray to any god to help them instead of fixing their own problems or moving society forward.

Amen!
posted by homodigitalis at 6:22 AM on August 7, 2007

One more argument - or current state of active atheism (death threats from 'believers' etc.):

Christopher Hitchens -- Religion


posted by homodigitalis at 6:30 AM on August 7, 2007

I don't think the point of the series or my posting it was at all to 'convert' anybody to atheism.
posted by empath at 6:36 AM on August 7, 2007

Any opinion I may have of atheists has been formed entirely from reading Metafilter. And, to put it kindly, a bunch of dogmatists, largely intolerant of anyone holding contrary views. In character, they seem rather like those 'televangelists' one hears about.

I'll take Door Number 3, Monty.
posted by Goofyy at 7:24 AM on August 7, 2007

"And, to put it kindly, a bunch of dogmatists, largely intolerant of anyone holding contrary views."

The intolerant part is true, but that dogmatism part certainly isn't.
posted by nthdegx at 7:46 AM on August 7, 2007

Legomancer - I also don't imagine the series was designed to convert anyone. As a public service broadcaster, the BBC will commission works reflecting various aspects of cultural history and the like that it thinks are relevant or of interest to some section of the viewing public. Better still if it can get a major figure like Miller, or Stephen Fry and his history of depression. Long may it continue to do so.
posted by Abiezer at 7:59 AM on August 7, 2007

"largely intolerant of anyone holding contrary views."

Most of he atheists I know are quite tolerant. It would be impossible to function in the U.S. if you were unable to deal with religious people. I'll explain why I disagree with someone's beliefs but I don't judge people based on their religion.
posted by McLir at 9:31 AM on August 7, 2007

McLir: You might be more correct. I may be reacting to some of the more noisy individuals. Not that some of that sort of thing isn't understandable, considering the mindless bunch of alleged christians trying to control public policy in America, these days. But that crap has just served to make me more sensitive to anyone's getting pushy about their belief, or lack thereof.
posted by Goofyy at 10:01 AM on August 7, 2007

I've seen it, but Im happy to see it again. :)
posted by jeffburdges at 10:03 AM on August 7, 2007

Frankly, I hope I'm right and that there is no God. The idea that there is such a being ranges from intolerable at best to horrifying at worst, in my estimation.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:09 AM on August 7, 2007

I'll explain why I disagree with someone's beliefs but I don't judge people based on their religion.

This doesn't seem reasonable to me. Is your impression of Tom Cruise unaltered by the fact that he's a Scientologist?
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:10 AM on August 7, 2007

"And, to put it kindly, a bunch of dogmatists, largely intolerant of anyone holding contrary views."

What is this stuff about intolerance that's been commented on lately? Why are there never any linked examples? Most of the 'intolerance' amounts to 'LOL-Believers', which is not really much different from the believer's view of atheists. Where there might be 'intolerance' in some people's views might be over issues like abortion or teaching ID in schools. But who in these cases is being intolerant? I'd suggest that the believers are being intolerant here. Then you'd have to ask whether society at large should be tolerant of believer-style intolerance? I'd suggest that society shouldn't be. Is this the style of intolerance that's being talked about here?
posted by DarkForest at 10:25 AM on August 7, 2007

St Urbain's Horseman: The BBC page about the series lists only three parts...

There were some longer conversational clips that made up an appendix of sorts, dubbed The Atheism Tapes, some (all?) of which are also available on the Goo-Tube.
posted by Western Infidels at 10:41 AM on August 7, 2007 [1 favorite]

On the other hand, I don't think anyone has anything against a positive personal religion. I think the problems come about when believers attempt to impose their beliefs on society at large. Though people might be rightly aghast at things like stoning people over infidelity.
posted by DarkForest at 10:43 AM on August 7, 2007

Well, at least we're at the point where Christians ask us nicely to shut up instead of trying to have us killed.
posted by empath at 10:49 AM on August 7, 2007

"Is your impression of Tom Cruise unaltered by the fact that he's a Scientologist?"

He's a pretty talented actor. I don't really care about his personal life. Beck was born into Scientology. I don't care about that either. He makes great music.
posted by McLir at 11:09 AM on August 7, 2007

Beck was born into Scientology. I don't care about that either. He makes great music.

I think the case can be made that he did his best work during the period in which he drifted away from the church. Ever since being re-absorbed around 2002-03, he's been pretty creatively self-cannibalistic, in my opinion. Of course, that doesn't mean those two things are related, of course...
posted by anazgnos at 1:01 PM on August 7, 2007

and on that subject...
posted by anazgnos at 1:04 PM on August 7, 2007

Thanks for posting this empath. The discussion with the anthropologist was really enlightening for me. I always figured that religion existed for those very primitive reasons. If you know where lightning and thunder come from, why hide under a rock/deity?

This also taught me what I can call myself; a deist. So cool. Too many good quotes to list too. Great stuff.
posted by snsranch at 3:43 PM on August 7, 2007 [1 favorite]

Ambrose Bierce
RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable.

"What is your religion my son?" inquired the Archbishop of Rheims.

"Pardon, monseigneur," replied Rochebriant; "I am ashamed of it."

"Then why do you not become an atheist?"

"Impossible! I should be ashamed of atheism."

"In that case, monsieur, you should join the Protestants."
posted by hortense at 6:47 PM on August 7, 2007

This is mental masturbation of the worst kind. While I am fascinated by the subject, I lost all interest during his 10 minute definition of the word "belief." This is not a history of anything, as there are very few facts introduced. This is, instead, an attempt to define the abstract notion of atheism and belief in general, which is of very little value or interest to me.
posted by JPowers at 9:56 PM on August 7, 2007

I feel I should point out something which everyone seemed to have missed: As reported in the actual video, the title of this series is "Atheism: A Rough History of Disbelief" not "a brief history".
posted by Arturus at 3:39 AM on August 8, 2007

I like the word Apatheist. I no longer care about this argument.
posted by chuckdarwin at 6:04 AM on August 8, 2007 [2 favorites]