Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2 Deniii
Etimologie
Cuvntul "ateism" este format din dou cuvinte greceti: - Ateismul puternic:[18] negare a existenei lui Dumneprexul a (care nseamn fr) i suxul theos (care zeu i a oricrei diviniti; concepie care se bazeaz pe
nseamn zeu). Astfel, un ateu este cineva care nu crede aceast negare.[19]
1
- Ateismul de facto:
divinitilor.[18]
lipsa credinei n existena bine de dragul binelui nu de frica unei diviniti inexistente. Printre ateii de renume pot enumerai, Stephen
Hawkings, Richard Dawkins, etc
Istoric
n Grecia antic Epicurismul ncorpora aspecte ale ateismului, dar a disprut din tradiia lozoc pe msura
dezvoltrii cretinismului. n timpul Renaterii conceptul de ateism a reaprut ca o acuz adus celor ce puneau
la ndoial starea de lucruri religioas, ns acesta ctig
prestigiu n epoca Luminilor. n secolul al XX-lea ateismul a devenit o poziie lozoc exprimat cu precdere
n cercurile raionalitilor i ale umanitilor seculari. Dea lungul istoriei, muli oameni de tiin, lozo, scriitori
i oameni politici au fost atei.
n cadrul raionalismului tiinic se ajunge la ndoieli privind existena lui Dumnezeu nu datorit unei descoperiri
anume, ci progresiv. Pe de o parte e simplu de pus sub
semnul ntrebrii existena creaiei aa cum e descris de
religie: tiina nu a putut dovedi concludent c a existat
un potop mondial iar secvena evoluionar a universului
nu coincide cu nici o versiune a genezei religioase; mai
mult, toate fenomenele care erau explicate ca suprana4 Ateism, etic i religie
turale au cptat n timp explicaii tiinice. n aceste
condiii principiul parcimoniei (Briciul lui Occam) imMulte religii arm c moralitatea este derivat din po- plic ipoteza prezenei divine ca nenecesar.[22][23]
runcile unei anumite zeiti i c teama de zei este un factor major n motivarea oamenilor pentru o conduit etic.
Ca urmare, ateii au fost deseori acuzai ca ind amorali 5.2 Problema rului
sau imorali. Ateii resping aceast acuz i arm c sunt
la fel de motivai de o comportare etic ca oricine altci- Problema rului e probabil cel mai vechi i mai puternic
neva e prin educaie, e prin umanism, legislaie sau argument al ateismului contra religiei. Pe scurt, existena
dorina de a avea o bun reputaie i respectul de sine. Ei rului n lume e incompatibil cu existena unui Dumarm c un comportament cu adevrat etic deriv din nezeu binevoitor, i e mai rezonabil s concluzionezi c
motivaii altruiste, nu din teama de pedeaps sau speran- Dumnezeu nu exist dect c exist dar nu face nimic s
[24]
a n rsplat dup moarte. Mai mult, ei citeaz faptul c opreasc Rul.
n multe religii conceptul de moralitate e prezentat doar Aceast problem a fost formulat prima dat de losoca o list de interdicii (s nu...), ceea ce nu e sucient ful grec antic Epicur, de aceea mai este cunoscut i sub
pentru un comportament cu adevrat etic - moralitatea ar numele de Paradoxul lui Epicur:
trebui s e i pozitiv, nu doar negativ; fac i ce trebuie
s fac, nu doar m abin de la ce trebuie s nu fac.
Vrea Dumnezeu s opreasc rul, dar nu poaDei n mod evident este preferabil o conduit motivate? Atunci nu este atotputernic. Poate Dumnet de pornirea altruist i empatic a omului, dect una
zeu s opreasc rul, dar nu vrea? Atunci el nincitat de teama de pedepse aplicate de o zeitate n imesui este ru. Poate i vrea Dumnezeu s opreasdiatul imanent sau n eluzivul transcendent, fapt rmne
c rul? Atunci de ce mai exist ru n lume?
c exist i studii care susin c virtutea i eciena religiNu poate i nu vrea Dumnezeu s opreasc rei i religiozitii pot funciona uneori ca stimulent moral:
ul? Atunci de ce l numim Dumnezeu?
unele studii arm c credincioii n SUA se dovedesc a
astfel mai altruiti dect ateii, c ei i folosesc timpul
ntr-un mod mai constructiv dect ateii, i, mai important, 5.3 Motivaia istoric
reuesc s-i nfrneze mai bine tentaiile impulsive, fapt
vital n orice planicare pe termen lung, e c e vorba Istoria evreilor, aa cum ne este ea prezentat de istoridespre carier, coal sau nane personale. Cei credin- ograa i arheologia modern, nu corespunde acelei vercioi, deci par a mai sociabili dect ateii, mai implicai siuni mitice redate de Biblie. Teme centrale ale istorin comunitate i, n ne, mai fericii.[20] Voltaire spunea ei relaiei omului (evreilor) cu Dumnezeu, precum istocndva c ar vrea ca avocatul lui, i croitorul lui, i valeii ria Patriarhilor, exodul, cucerirea Canaanului, istoria molui, ba chiar pn i nevasta lui, s cread n Dumnezeu, narhic i exilul, ori nu au existat pur i simplu, ori ele
acestuia plcndu-i s cread c astfel va escrocat mai s-au desfurat sensibil diferit fa de versiunea biblic
rar, i c i se vor pune mai rar coarne.[21] Ateismul pro- a faptelor, aceasta din urm dovedindu-se nalmente o
moveaz etica i moralul fr a nfricoa cu o pedeaps versiune ideologizat i politizat, practic o ncercare de
ulterioar, ci bazndu-se strict pe produse ale raiunii i rescriere naionalist i expansionist a istoriei de ctre
gndirii libere i progresive. Ateii sunt oameni care fac monarhia regatului sudic (Iuda), dup cderea Israelului
5.3
Motivaia istoric
(regatul nordic). Vezi pentru asta recenta lucrare a directorului Institului de Arheologie i Istorie de pe lng
Universitatea din Tel-Aviv, anume profesorul Israel Finkelstein, lucrare numit "Biblia dezgropat" (The Bible
Unearthed).[25]
Din punct de vedere arheologic i istoric, redatarea acestor orae de la epoca lui Solomon la perioada omrid are
implicaii enorme. Ea nltur singura dovad arheologic dup care ar existat vreodat o monarhie unit cu
capitala n Ierusalim i arat c David i Solomon erau, n
termeni politici, nimic altceva dect cpitani ai inutului
deluros, a cror raz administrativ era limitat la nivelul
local, adic la inutul deluros.[25]
Israel Finkelstein i Neil Asher Silberman, The Bible
Unearthed. Archaeologys New Vision of Ancient Israel
and The Origin of Its Sacred Texts.
Dar excavrile din oraul lui David au oferit descoperiri
impresionante din Epoca mijlocie a bronzului i din secolele ulterioare ale Epocii erului - dar nu din secolul al
X-lea .e.n. Cea mai optimist evaluare a acestei dovezi
negative este c Ierusalimul din secolul a X-lea era limitat ca suprafa, probabil nu mai mare dect un sat tipic
pentru inutul deluros.[26]
Israel Finkelstein i Neil Asher Silberman, The Bible Bart D. Ehrman, Gods Problem. How the Bible Fails
Unearthed. Archaeologys New Vision of Ancient Israel to Answer Our Most Important QuestionWhy We Suer
and The Origin of Its Sacred Texts.
Prima ntrebare era dac Moise putea ntr-adevr auIdolatria poporului lui Iuda nu era o abatere de la un mo- torul celor Cinci Cri ale lui Moise, din moment ce ulnoteism anterior al lor. Ea era de fapt felul n care poporul tima carte, Deuteronomul, descrie n mod foarte detaliat
lui Iuda se nchina de sute de ani.[27]
timpul precis i mprejurrile proprii mori a lui Moise.
Israel Finkelstein i Neil Asher Silberman, The Bible Alte incoerene au devenit rapid clare: textul biblic era
Unearthed. Archaeologys New Vision of Ancient Israel ncrcat cu paranteze literare care explicau numele antic
al unor locuri i remarcau n mod frecvent c dovezi ale
and The Origin of Its Sacred Texts.
faimoaselor evenimente biblice erau disponibile pn n
ziua de azi . Aceti factori i-au convins pe unii cercetDac cineva vrea s susin c Dumnezeu a inspirat - tori din secolul al XVII-lea c cel puin primele cinci cri
ecare cuvinel al scripturii, ce rost ar avea asta dac nu ale Bibliei au fost alctuite, amplicate i nfrumuseate
avem cuvintele originare ale scripturii? n anumite lo- de editori ulteriori, anonimi i de revizori din secolele cacuri, aa cum vom vedea, pur i simplu nu putem siguri re au urmat.
c am reconstruit cu acuratee textul original. Este cam Spre sfritul secolului al XVIII-lea i preponderent n cel
greu s tii ce nseamn cuvintele Bibliei dac nici mcar de-al XIX-lea muli cercettori critici ai Bibliei au ncenu tim care sunt cuvintele ei!
put s se ndoiasc de faptul c Moise ar avut ceva deAceasta a devenit o problem pentru viziunea mea asu- a face cu scrierea crilor Pentateuhului; ei au ajuns s
pra inspiraiei, cci mi-am dat seama c nu ar fost mai cread c Biblia era n mod exclusiv opera unor autori
dicil pentru Dumnezeu s pstreze netirbite cuvintele trzii. Aceti cercettori au artat ceea ce preau drept
scripturii dect i-a fost s le inspire iniial. Dac el dorea versiuni diferite ale acelorai poveti din crile Pentateca poporul su s aibe cuvintele sale, cu siguran i le-ar uhului, sugernd c textul biblic era produsul mai multor
transmis lui (i poate le-ar transmis cuvintele ntr-o scriitori care puteau astfel recunoscui. O citire atent a
limb pe care s-o neleag, mai degrab dect n greac
DEMOGRAFIE
Demograe
5
menea, un rol[49] . Studii privind proporia condamnailor
la nchisoare fr instruire religioas plaseaz procentul
la aproximativ 0.1%[50] . Pe de alt parte, alte analize statistice demonstreaz c procentul de arestri este invers
proporional cu angajamentul religios n comunitate (numrul de participri la serviciile religioase n biserici),
aa cum arat un studiu american al National Opinion Research Center ptr. anii 1974-2004.[51] .
Vezi i
Ateismul n Romnia
Agnosticism
Argumente pro i contra existenei lui Dumnezeu
Controversa creaie-evoluionism
Deism
Dumnezeu
Liste de atei
Monoteism
Panteism
Pandeism
Raionalism
Religie
Scepticism
Secularism
Referine
[1] Nielsen 2011: Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism
consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is
to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following
reasons ... : for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that
there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God ... because
the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent;
for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers ... because the concept of
God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic
substancee.g., God is just another name for love, or
... a symbolic term for moral ideals.
[2] Edwards 2005: On our denition, an 'atheist' is a person
who rejects belief in God, regardless of whether or not
his reason for the rejection is the claim that 'God exists
expresses a false proposition. People frequently adopt an
attitude of rejection toward a position for reasons other
8 REFERINE
Judah was not a departure from their earlier monotheism. It was, instead, the way the people of Judah had
worshipped for hundreds of years.
[28] Ehrman, Bart (2005).
Introduction (n englez). MISQUOTING JESUS. The Story Behind Who
Changed the Bible and Why (ed.
First Edition).
New York: HarperSanFrancisco. p. 11. ISBN
9780060738174.
http://books.google.nl/books?
id=99chXHGSVH0C&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=
If+one+wants+to+insist+that+God+inspired+the+
very+words+of+scripture,+what+would+be+the+
point+if+we+don%27t+have+the+very+words+of+
scripture%3F&source=bl&ots=yccb9JzRbE&sig=
nbZegPGDnTeaewU4N53TgguDnR4&hl=en&ei=
mvIVTM6sOpLu0wTArqiHCg&sa=X&oi=book_
result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAQ#
v=onepage&q=If%20one%20wants%20to%20insist%
20that%20God%20inspired%20the%20very%
20words%20of%20scripture%2C%20what%20would%
20be%20the%20point%20if%20we%20don%
27t%20have%20the%20very%20words%20of%
20scripture%3F&f=false. If one wants to insist that
God inspired the very words of scripture, what would be
the point if we don't have the very words of scripture?
In some places, as we will see, we simply cannot be sure
that we have reconstructed the original text accurately.
Its a bit hard to know what the words of the Bible mean
if we don't even know what the words are! This became a
problem for my view of inspiration, for I came to realize
that it would have been no more dicult for God to
preserve the words of scripture than it would have been
for him to inspire them in the rst place. If he wanted
his people to have his words, surely he would have given
them to them (and possibly even given them the words in
a language they could understand, rather than Greek and
Hebrew). The fact that we don't have the words surely
must show, I reasoned, that he did not preserve them for
us. And if he didn't perform that miracle, there seemed
to be no reason to think that he performed the earlier
miracle of inspiring those words.
[29] Ehrman, Bart (2008). Suering and a Crisis of Faith (n
englez). Gods Problem. How the Bible Fails to Answer
Our Most Important QuestionWhy We Suer (ed. Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader). New York: HarperCollins. p.
7. ISBN 9780061578311. But I had been asked to teach
a course called The Problem of Suering in the Biblical
Traditions. I welcomed the opportunity because it seemed like an interesting way to approach the Bible: examining the responses given by various biblical authors to the
question of why there is suering in the world, in particular among the people of God. It was my belief then, and
continues to be my belief now, that dierent biblical authors had dierent solutions to the question of why Gods
people suer: some (such as the prophets) thought that
suering came from God as a punishment for sin; some
thought that suering came from Gods cosmic enemies,
who inicted suering precisely because people tried to
do what was right before God; others thought that suering came as a test to see if people would remain faithful
despite suering; others said that suering was a mystery
and that it was wrong even to question why God allowed it;
still others thought that this world is just an inexplicable
8 REFERINE
[45] Survey on physicians religious beliefs shows majority faithful. The University of Chicago. http://
chronicle.uchicago.edu/050714/doctorsfaith.shtml. Retrieved 201104-08. The rst study of physician religious beliefs has found that 76 percent of doctors believe in
God and 59 percent believe in some sort of afterlife. The
survey, performed by researchers at the University and published in the July issue of the Journal of General Internal
Medicine, found that 90 percent of doctors in the United
States attend religious services at least occasionally compared to 81 percent of all adults.
[46] Scientists and Belief.
Pew Research Cenhttp://pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethics/
ter.
Scientists-and-Belief.aspx. Retrieved 201104-08. A
survey of scientists who are members of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted
by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
in May and June 2009, nds that members of this group
are, on the whole, much less religious than the general
public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are
roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in
God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over
half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity
or higher power; specically, 33% of scientists say they
believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or
higher power.
[47] Shermer, Michael (1999). How We Believe: Science,
Skepticism, and the Search for God. New York: William H Freeman. pp. pp7679. ISBN 0-7167-3561-X.
[48] According to Dawkins (2006), p. 103. Dawkins cites Bell, Paul. Would you believe it?" Mensa Magazine, UK
Edition, Feb. 2002, pp. 1213. Analyzing 43 studies carried out since 1927, Bell found that all but four reported
such a connection, and he concluded that the higher ones
intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be
religious or hold 'beliefs of any kind.
[49] Argyle, Michael (1958). Religious Behaviour. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul. pp. 9396. ISBN 0-41517589-5.
[50] http://current.com/community/92831935_
atheists-supply-less-than-1-of-prison-populations-while-christians-make-up-75.
Harris, Sam (31 martie 2006).
htm
[51] A Friendly Letter To Skeptics And Atheists: Musings On
Why God Is Good And Faith Isnt Evil, David G. Myers,
published by Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint 2008 by The
David and Carol Myers Foundation, p.72
Bibliograe
Armstrong, Karen (1999). A History of God. London: Vintage. ISBN 0-09-927367-5
Baggini, Julian (2003). Atheism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN
0-19-280424-3
The Myth of
Secular Moral Chaos.
Free Inquiry 26 (3).
ISSN 0272-0701. https://www.secularhumanism.
org/index.php/articles/2863. Accesat la 21 noiembrie 2013. alternate URL
10
Landsberg, Mitchell (28 septembrie 2010).
Atheists, agnostics most knowledgeable about religion, survey says.
Los Angeles Times.
Arhivat din original la 11 mai 2011.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110511180716/
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/28/nation/
la-na-religion-survey-20100928.
Accesat la 8
aprilie 2011.
Martin, Michael (1990). Atheism: A Philosophical
Justication. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press. ISBN 978-0-87722-642-0. http://books.
google.ca/books?id=MNZqCoor4eoC&lpg=
PP1&dq=Atheism%3A%20A%20Philosophical%
20Justification&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=true.
Accesat la 9 aprilie 2011
Martin, Michael, ed (2006). The Cambridge
Companion to Atheism. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 0-521-84270-0. http:
//books.google.com/books?id=tAeFipOVx4MC&
pg=PA8#v=onepage&q&f=true. Accesat la 25
noiembrie 2013
Nielsen, Kai (2013). Atheism. Encyclopdia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/
topic/40634/atheism. Accesat la 25 noiembrie
2013.
Rowe, William L. (1998). Atheism. in Edward
Craig.
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-07310-3.
http://books.google.com/?id=lnuwFH_M5o0C&
pg=PA530&lpg=PA530&dq=atheism+routledge#
v=onepage&q=atheism%20routledge&f=false.
Accesat la 9 aprilie 2011.
Russell, Bertrand (1957). Why I am not a Christian, and other essays on religion and related subjects.
Simon and Schuster
Sartre, Jean-Paul (2001) [1946]. Existentialism
and Humanism. in Priest, Stephen. Jean-Paul Sartre: Basic Writings. London: Routledge. p. 45.
ISBN 0-415-21367-3
Sartre, Jean-Paul (2004) [1946]. An existentialist ethics. in Gensler, Harry J.; Spurgin, Earl W.;
Swindal, James C.. Ethics: Contemporary Readings.
London: Routledge. p. 127. ISBN 0-415-25680-1
Shermer, Michael (1999). How We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God. New York:
William H Freeman. ISBN 0-7167-3561-X
Smith, George H. (1979). Atheism: The Case Against God. Bualo, New York: Prometheus Books.
ISBN 0-87975-124-X
Stenger, Victor J. (2007). God: The Failed
HypothesisHow Science Shows That God Does Not
Exist. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
ISBN 978-1-59102-652-5
BIBLIOGRAFIE
11
Krueger, D. E. (1998). What is Atheism?: A Short
Introduction. New York: Prometheus. ISBN 157392-214-5
DlVtfUxPD14C&lpg=PP1&dq=Arguing%
20about%20Gods&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=
true. Accesat la 9 aprilie 2011
Ledrew, S. (2012).
The evolution of atheism:
Scientic and humanistic approaches.
History of the Human Sciences 25 (3): 70.
doi:10.1177/0952695112441301.
Le Poidevin, R. (1996).
Arguing for Atheism:
An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Religion. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-41509338-4.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=
M4YlYZi_cMUC&lpg=PP1&dq=Arguing%
20for%20Atheism%3A%20An%20Introduction%
20to%20the%20Philosophy%20of%20Religion&
pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=true
Mackie, J. L. (1982). The Miracle of Theism: Arguments For and Against the Existence of God. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-824682-X
Maritain, Jacques (1952). The Range of Reason. London: Georey Bles. http://www.nd.edu/
Departments/Maritain/etext/range.htm. Accesat la
15 aprilie 2013
Martin, Michael (1990). Atheism: A Philosophical
Justication.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN 0-87722-943-0. http://books.
google.ca/books?id=MNZqCoor4eoC&lpg=
PP1&dq=Atheism%3A%20A%20Philosophical%
20Justification&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=true.
Accesat la 9 aprilie 2011
Michael Martin & Ricki Monnier, ed (2003). The
Impossibility of God. Bualo, NY: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-59102-120-0
Michael Martin & Ricki Monnier, ed (2006). The
Improbability of God. Bualo, NY: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-59102-381-5
McTaggart, John; McTaggart, Ellis (1930) [1906].
Some Dogmas of Religion (ed. New). London:
Edward Arnold & Co.. ISBN 0-548-14955-0
Nielsen, Kai (1985). Philosophy and Atheism. New
York: Prometheus. ISBN 0-87975-289-0
Nielsen, Kai (2001). Naturalism and Religion. New
York: Prometheus. ISBN 1-57392-853-4
Robinson, Richard (1964). An Atheists Values. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-824191-7. http:
//www.positiveatheism.org/hist/athval0.htm. Accesat la 9 aprilie 2011
Rosenberg, Alex (2011). The Atheists Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions. New York: W.
W. Norton & Co. ISBN 978-0-393-08023-0
Russell, Paul (11 februarie 2013). Hume on Religion. in Edward N. Zalta. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ed. 2013). Metaphysics
Research Lab. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/
hume-religion/. Accesat la 24 noiembrie 2013.
Sharpe, R.A. (1997). The Moral Case Against Religious Belief. London: SCM Press. ISBN 0-33402680-6
Thrower, James (1971). A Short History of Western
Atheism. London: Pemberton. ISBN 0-301-711011
Walters, Kerry (2010). Atheism: A Guide for the
Perplexed. New York: Continuum. ISBN 978-08264-2493-8
Zuckerman, Phil (2010). Society without God: What
the Least Religious Nations Can Tell Us About Contentment. NYU Press. ISBN 0-8147-9723-7
Zuckerman, Phil, ed (2010). Atheism and secularity.
Santa Barbara, Calif. [u.a.]: Praeger. ISBN 978-0313-35183-9
10 Legturi externe
Pagina romneasc despre ateism
The New Atheists in The Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy
12
The Demand for Religion A study on the demographics of Atheism by Wolfgang Jagodzinski (University of Cologne) and Andrew Greeley (University
of Chicago and University of Arizona).
10
LEGTURI EXTERNE
13
11
11.1
Text
Ateism Surs: https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ateism?oldid=10120763 Contribuitori: Gutza, Bogdan, Robbot, Zavandi~rowiki, AnaZ, Mihaiam, YurikBot, Arado, AdiJapan, Vlad, Jean, RobotQuistnix, Stefan Udrea, Chupy, Dpotop, Anclation, Miehs, FlaBot, Strainubot,
Donjoe, Netics, GEO, Sylvester~rowiki, Victor Blacus, Escarbot, MHortulanus, Thijs!bot, JAnDbot, Al, Mvelam, Bobinius, Krrypton,
DorganBot, Urzic, Azdfg, VolkovBot, Aibot, Daria88stefy, Basty goofy~rowiki, TXiKiBoT, SieBot, SFdixit, Synthebot, Rad Urs, Idiomabot, BotMultichill, Tgeorgescu, Byrialbot, Impy4ever, Remus Octavian Mocanu, RadufanBot, Asybaris01, DragonBot, Nicolae Coman,
Alexander Tendler, Alexbot, BOTarate, SilvonenBot, Alecs.bot, Numbo3-bot, Luckas-bot, Rubinbot, Zece1314, ArthurBot, AndreiMiculita, Aether, Xqbot, Smbotin, Almabot, GhalyBot, Arpisz, RibotBOT, Obersachsebot, TobeBot, Zenzor, Anna Baldestarde, Cineva
Cinevalescu, EmausBot, Ionutp, Memo18, PRN2, WikitanvirBot, Mjbmrbot, ChuispastonBot, DixonDBot, MerlIwBot, Pafsanias, Breezybadger, JYBot, GT, XXN, Addbot, Kolega2357-Bot, BreakBot, Ady.neag, XXN-bot, Valp17, KasparBot, Patru bogdan i Anonim:
39
11.2
Images
Emilfaro permite oricui s utilizeze aceast oper n orice scop, fr nicio condiie, atta timp ct asemenea condiii nu sunt cerute de lege.
Fiier:Paul_Heinrich_Dietrich_Baron_d'Holbach.jpg
Surs:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Paul_
Heinrich_Dietrich_Baron_d%27Holbach.jpg Licen: Public domain Contribuitori: Source: English Wikipedia [1] Artist original:
Necunoscut
Fiier:Wikibooks-logo.svg Surs: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikibooks-logo.svg Licen: CC BY-SA 3.0
Contribuitori: Oper proprie Artist original: User:Bastique, User:Ramac et al.
Fiier:Wikidata-logo.svg Surs: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg Licen: Public domain Contribuitori: Oper proprie Artist original: User:Planemad
Fiier:Wikiquote-logo.svg Surs: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikiquote-logo.svg Licen: Public domain
Contribuitori: ? Artist original: ?
Fiier:Wikisource-logo.svg Surs: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg Licen: CC BY-SA
3.0 Contribuitori: Rei-artur Artist original: Nicholas Moreau
Fiier:Wikiversity-logo-Snorky.svg Surs: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Wikiversity-logo-en.svg Licen:
CC BY-SA 3.0 Contribuitori: Oper proprie Artist original: Snorky
Fiier:Wiktionary-logo-en.svg Surs: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Wiktionary-logo-en.svg Licen: Public
domain Contribuitori: Vector version of Image:Wiktionary-logo-en.png. Artist original: Vectorized by Fvasconcellos (Discuie contribuii),
based on original logo tossed together by Brion Vibber
11.3
Content license