the actual answer is that 'trad' is a conservative aesthetic, and one that implicitly defines itself contrary to atheism by donning Catholic symbols, which is a rich vein. But because it dons the mantle of christianity, it cannot ever, really, be atheist as well, aesthetically speaking. the two streams are contradictory!
it doesnt help that 'trad atheism' has less aethetica to work with, having only existed, really, since the founding of classical liberalism, but it certainly still exists! One might argue that the Soviets and their cultural outputs were the closest thing we have to what could be called 'trad atheism'.
The reason you dont see 'trad atheists' in america in particular is because America has spent enormous amounts of time, money, and energy discrediting its former adversary through its propaganda outreach. (not hyperbole, im not using the word propaganda here morally, only descriptively)
I’m tempted to dispute the premise. Do atheists really do a bunch of weird stuff? I’m a second-generation atheist married to a second-generation atheist, pretty much everyone I have ever been close to has been an atheist, I just sorta assume by default that everyone I encounter is an atheist, and I’m rarely hit over the head by turning out to be wrong. All these people seem pretty boring and normal, “phenotypically” trad in the sense of doing the done thing (going to school, graduating, getting jobs, showing up on time to things, maybe having kids), even if they would not characterize themselves as self-consciously trad or self-consciously anything. Isn’t the whole “PMC” just kinda ambiently atheist and non-radical? Maybe there’s a poll or something that could resolve this empirically.
Then I’m surprised that atheists are less frequently self-consciously trad! Like I feel like there’s a sense in which it would make sense to see Amish-style atheist holdouts doing stuff like waiting a couple of gnereations to adopt hormonal birth control
It's weird that first you give the actual, boring, expected answer (namely that being an atheist requires going against tradition, thus it attracts people who tend to go against tradition), then you say that it is somehow weird and surprising. I can't see what you feel it is surprising about it.
I think that people in general tend to treat atheism and radicalism as logically related instead of as related by personality type, don’t you? So I was surprised when I conceived of things the other way.
the actual answer is that 'trad' is a conservative aesthetic, and one that implicitly defines itself contrary to atheism by donning Catholic symbols, which is a rich vein. But because it dons the mantle of christianity, it cannot ever, really, be atheist as well, aesthetically speaking. the two streams are contradictory!
it doesnt help that 'trad atheism' has less aethetica to work with, having only existed, really, since the founding of classical liberalism, but it certainly still exists! One might argue that the Soviets and their cultural outputs were the closest thing we have to what could be called 'trad atheism'.
The reason you dont see 'trad atheists' in america in particular is because America has spent enormous amounts of time, money, and energy discrediting its former adversary through its propaganda outreach. (not hyperbole, im not using the word propaganda here morally, only descriptively)
not to mention is systematic dismantling of the CPUSA, which would have been the bedrock of a so-called 'conservative communist aesthetic'
its hard to have a 'tradition' to return to without a steady continuity. this is why catholicism works so well for trads!
*Are* they contradictory? "Atheism, but with Christian iconography" seems like a pretty good description of Satanism.
I’m tempted to dispute the premise. Do atheists really do a bunch of weird stuff? I’m a second-generation atheist married to a second-generation atheist, pretty much everyone I have ever been close to has been an atheist, I just sorta assume by default that everyone I encounter is an atheist, and I’m rarely hit over the head by turning out to be wrong. All these people seem pretty boring and normal, “phenotypically” trad in the sense of doing the done thing (going to school, graduating, getting jobs, showing up on time to things, maybe having kids), even if they would not characterize themselves as self-consciously trad or self-consciously anything. Isn’t the whole “PMC” just kinda ambiently atheist and non-radical? Maybe there’s a poll or something that could resolve this empirically.
Then I’m surprised that atheists are less frequently self-consciously trad! Like I feel like there’s a sense in which it would make sense to see Amish-style atheist holdouts doing stuff like waiting a couple of gnereations to adopt hormonal birth control
I think that is basically what Robin Hanson has been trying to manifest 🤔
It's weird that first you give the actual, boring, expected answer (namely that being an atheist requires going against tradition, thus it attracts people who tend to go against tradition), then you say that it is somehow weird and surprising. I can't see what you feel it is surprising about it.
I think that people in general tend to treat atheism and radicalism as logically related instead of as related by personality type, don’t you? So I was surprised when I conceived of things the other way.
Do you mean "trad" as in specifically Catholic, or weird, bad internet slippage?
I think atheists think of themselves as people who are willing to follow evidence to its conclusions, doesn’t it seem like that to you?