for some reason I was surfing off the usual sites I surf and by accident found your site.

First, whether god exists is for most of humanity, irrelevant. It is only the montheists that make a big issue of it. And they can't even agree on what they presume that everyone should agree on. Which discredits the whole proposition from the start anyway. god is an unprovable hallucination.

Chinese civilization is based on three main strains, as I understand it.

First, Confucianism, which is an ethical system that has nothing to do with a Supreme deity.

Second, Buddhism. When the historical buddha was asked if god existed, he maintained silence. Wouldn't even discuss it because it was his positon that we must work out our own lives, through the cultivation of the virtues of confidence, energy, patience, inquiry and awareness (among others). No God in there. Irrelevant.

Finally you have Taoism, which shares with Buddhism an emphasis on developing mental clarity through various exercises "yoga" which means 'getting yourself together".

Significantly, India and China neither of which have been heavily infuenced by montheism, are eating our lunch. They both have millenial long systems of scholarship and and critical thinking. No need for a god, just use yer 'ed!

Lastly, as to whether Atheism is a belief, that is a point to consider.

My personal favorite philosopher was the Indian Nagarjuna, who basically said that if you look at any proposition logically, sooner or later it self destructs. In other words, reality is unfathomable.

The rabbit hole is infinitely deep.

He said that belief and even spiritual practise are "fruitful fiction"

So hey, if belief in a god works for you, great, just don't take it so seriously that you go about disagreeing and ultimately maybe fighting or killing to support your widdle selfcentered world view.

That's my world view. wanna fight:)?

I don't know about fight -- but I would like to disagree.

I don't think whether or not god exists is irrelevant. It seems like a pretty important philosophical topic -- particularly since plenty of people say that they base their most meaningful actions on the answer to that question. Whether people agree on the nature of god proves nothing about a deity's existence. It's also odd to me that you bring up Buddhism, etc., since these beliefs have a lot of "unprovable hallucination" of their own, even if they don't involve a conscious creator.

From the little I've read about Nagarjuna, he wasn't just talking about religious belief but about everything. So (unless I'm wrong about him) his saying that religion isn't real isn't that big a surprise.

Your paragraph about people who believe in god fighting to support their "widdle selfcentered world view" is incredibly condescending. If people do believe in god, they should take it seriously -- it's perhaps the most important thing in the world. In fact, I think we'd be far better off if (for example) everyone who said that they follow Jesus actually tried to act like him. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, and fighting or killing is bad no matter what the justification. I also hasten to point out that not believing in a Judeo-Christian god doesn't seem to do anything to guarantee peaceful existence (as many people in India and China, which you mention, might agree).