Atheism

[Sergeant Flutter]

Let's be real here and keep our own beliefs out of the conversation.

There's no real evidence that any medieval ruler was Atheist, therefore, I don't think that this should be added.

I know what you are about to say, "Aztecs didn't invade over the ocean! The Lithuanians weren't the Muslim Caliphs! The Karlings didn't stay in power until 1400!"

However, Atheism did not have the environment to become a large scale movement in the 1000s. Atheism originated primarily in the 1850s, during the height of the Industrial Revolution.

It may have existed in a small scale during this time period, however Governments were too aligned with the church for it to be shown.

Bishops would coronate Kings, Arabia had Caliphs, etc.

 

[A7X Anubis]

Atheism was a minority at the time. m'lady

 

[Rationalsanity]

A ruler being an atheist likely had no impact on a feudal realm or the former of government. Maybe said ruler would have to do penance if he spouted his mouth off in public. At most it would get individuals overthrown or killed.

Atheism being present in the game beyond the Cynical trait, low piety and flipping off priests and holy orders makes less sense than putting Hellenic in the game. And that already makes next to no sense.

 

[Haccoude]

What we really need in CK2 is not atheism or agnosticism, but more gnosticism.

And mystery cults.

 

[ikoko]

Atheism originated primarily in the 1850s, during the height of the Industrial Revolution

Now that's quite a shortcut here! Otherwise I agree.

 

[Jango40]

Atheism has probably existed in a small minority of population since forever, but it wasn't anything big until the 1800's, maybe with small spikes in specific periods of Ancient Greece/India, possibly during the Islamic Golden Era, etc. but the influence was minimal.

 

[The_Meme_Man]

Cynicism covers it, because what idiot king calls himself an atheist in the world of theists? He would most likely humor the population anyway than admit his atheism.

 

[Dr Gonzo]

Maybe cynic and scholar combined make and athiest

 

[SigurdStormhand]

If you get Cynic then there are a number of events which indicate your character doesn't believe in God/the Gods any more.

There have always been people who didn't believe in anything beyond the "mundane" world but there were no systems of atheist belief in this period. Which is to say, nobody (so far as we know) worked out a system of metaphysics, morals etc. for people who believed there was no God.

On the other hand, such systems were extant in some Monastic and Byzantine Libraries and they were gradually rediscovered from the Renaissance on, but they had no real traction in the Middle Ages. Atheism is usually a belief system of a settled, peaceable and economically and politically stable society.

In times of hardship people are more likely to pursue the comfort of the intangible, even if they don't really believe in it.

 

[Rubidium]

From the Wikipedia article on the History of Atheism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism#The_Middle_Ages

"In medieval Islam, Muslim scholars recognized the idea of atheism and frequently attacked unbelievers, although they were unable to name any atheists. When individuals were accused of atheism, they were usually viewed as heretics rather than proponents of atheism. However, outspoken rationalists and atheists existed, one notable figure being the ninth-century scholar Ibn al-Rawandi, who criticized the notion of religious prophecy, including that of Muhammad, and maintained that religious dogmas were not acceptable to reason and must be rejected. Other critics of religion in the Islamic world include the physician and philosopher Abu Bakr al-Razi (865–925), the poet Al-Maʿarri (973–1057), and the scholar Abu Isa al-Warraq (fl. 9th century). Al-Maʿarri, for example, wrote and taught that religion itself was a "fable invented by the ancients" and that humans were "of two sorts: those with brains, but no religion, and those with religion, but no brains."

If you dig further into the articles on those individuals, you'll note that the situation is significantly more nuanced; for example, we don't actually have any of al-Razi's works on religion, and thus have to rely on the summaries of commenters, many of whom disagree on his positions (and of course, none of the listed figures were actually rulers). More broadly, this is exactly the type of topic in which one should be very careful with using Wikipedia, as it is an inherently political area.

 

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

 

[AjayAlcos]

Au contraire... They actually gave their victims 30 day's notice.

 

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

Au contraire... They actually gave their victims 30 day's notice.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisitions 30-Days-Notice

 

[Subcomandante]

With characters who are not openly zealous or cynical is is not clear how sceptical or religious they are. Your character can be as sceptical as you want him, and then you can refine this when you get cynicism events if you want that.

 

[Woody Man]

Why there is not an option to be atheist in Crusader Kings II?

 

[Kllense]

I am an atheist, skeptic and a man of science (skeptical until hard evidence arises). But cynical is what I would be called in this period.

(Atheism is not a religion but I idgaf if you think I think about gods. I don't. Gods occupy 0% of my time. Also, I think you should stop this debate. No one will win because no one will acknowledge defeat.)

Atheists are there since the first religions were invented. Long before Judaism was henotheistic or the first Vedas. But it's anachronistic with CK2 because the term was not used. Deism should be in Eu4 but that's another forum.

 

[Lord Celestine]

Atheism wasn't a political force during the game's time period.

I agree with this comment, Bonaparte said religion was a wonderful tool to get people to do things, you have to think even if your king was secretly an atheist would he ever really announce that to anyone? As an Atheist myself why does the op feel the need that we need to tell everyone about our atheism? I never really talk about my religious beliefs unless someone asks me.

 

[Lord Celestine]

I am an atheist, skeptic and a man of science (skeptical until hard evidence arises). But cynical is what I would be called in this period.

(Atheism is not a religion but I idgaf if you think I think about gods. I don't. Gods occupy 0% of my time. Also, I think you should stop this debate. No one will win because no one will acknowledge defeat.)

Atheists are there since the first religions were invented. Long before Judaism was henotheistic or the first Vedas. But it's anachronistic with CK2 because the term was not used. Deism should be in Eu4 but that's another forum.

Zoroastrianism came before Judaism, and Zoroastrianism had a huge part to play in the molding of Christianity.

 

[SigurdStormhand]

I am an atheist, skeptic and a man of science (skeptical until hard evidence arises). But cynical is what I would be called in this period.

(Atheism is not a religion but I idgaf if you think I think about gods. I don't. Gods occupy 0% of my time. Also, I think you should stop this debate. No one will win because no one will acknowledge defeat.)

Atheists are there since the first religions were invented. Long before Judaism was henotheistic or the first Vedas. But it's anachronistic with CK2 because the term was not used. Deism should be in Eu4 but that's another forum.

I am a Christian, a skeptic and a man of Science - nice to meet you.

I think it's important to destinguish between Atheism as a belief an Atheism as a belief system.

To begin with - what is Atheism?

Atheism is not believing in a God - I say a God because Christians are technically Atheists - they don't believe in Zeus. That's important, because it demonstrates that Atheism is not actually a rational position, it can be arrived at by other means.

So what is Atheism as a belief system?

Atheism as a belief system is not believing in any God, or any supernatural forces, everything has a rational explanation. That in itself is not exactly a rational statement - for one thing you can usually throw out a weird coincidence or bizarre event that can't be explained by mundane mechanisms. The Atheist will respond to this nby saying "we don't know enough/don't have all the data". He cleaves to his belief there is a rational explanation even in the face of conflicting evidence.

That's not to say Atheism is unreasonable, it's as reasonable as Theism and like Theism there are intelligent and stupid positions.

How does this reflect on the CKII period?

Well, for starters there are no groups studying the Greek Atheist philosophy, both the Christians and Muslims are studying Aristotle and trying to synthesis his metaphysics into Christianity, Plato is largely neglected and the great atheists like Protagoras and Epicurus are so ignored that virtually none of their work has come down to us. It was not read so it was not copied, it may have been actively destroyed.

In India the situation is much more complex, and I am much less knowledgeable but I can say with some confidence that whilst early Buddhists did not believe there was an all-powerful God ruling the universe they generally DID believe that the beings worshipped as Gods existed.

So that's your general landscape, and frankly most people don't have a strong opinion one way or another on these matters - then or now. Atheism is as much a minority belief as it was a thousand years ago, as is really strong Theism. The difference between then and now is that we live in a very pluralistic society today - where people don't generally try to force things down your throat.

Go up to the average person today ask them if they believe in God and you'll more often than not get one of these answers:

"Well, maybe, I don't know."

"I'm not sure, but I think there might be something out there."

"Probably not"

"I like to think of myself as spiritual."

Question them further and you'll often find that even avowed Sceptics believe in things like "luck" or "chance" or some other odd superstition that's not entirely rational because we are not entirely rational beings. We tend to go with the general flow of society, too, and a lot of us will believe what "experts" tell us about a given subject without exerting a lot of critical thought, because we have better things to do.

 

[Battle bunny]

To begin with - what is Atheism?

Atheism is not believing in a God - I say a God because Christians are technically Atheists - they don't believe in Zeus. That's important, because it demonstrates that Atheism is not actually a rational position, it can be arrived at by other means.

What? No, not believing in one particular god while believing in other(s) is not actually atheism, nobody uses the word that way. I have no idea why you want to invent new, confusing meanings for words. (The word you are looking for is "monotheism", as contrasted to "henotheism".)

Atheism as a belief system is not believing in any God, or any supernatural forces, everything has a rational explanation. That in itself is not exactly a rational statement - for one thing you can usually throw out a weird coincidence or bizarre event that can't be explained by mundane mechanisms.

This is utter dishonesty - we are not in the habit of "throwing out" events that we cannot explain (which is not the same as "it cannot be explained" - an unprovable statement in and of itself since we would need to be omnipotent to be able to say so for sure). That's what the fundamentalists do. Scientists tend to update their theories when evidence falsifies their previous theory. Religious people tend to be the ones who have their pre-defined theory as the conclusion and try to adjust the evidence to it.

The Atheist will respond to this nby saying "we don't know enough/don't have all the data". He cleaves to his belief there is a rational explanation even in the face of conflicting evidence.

What "conflicting evidence"? A random-ass book telling a supernatural story isn't evidence of any sort. Religion brings no evidence to play.

That's not to say Atheism is unreasonable, it's as reasonable as Theism and like Theism there are intelligent and stupid positions.

How utterly generous of you.

How does this reflect on the CKII period?

Not at all.