According to Charvaka philosophy, all knowledge derives from the senses. Inference has no value and the scriptures are false. What cannot be seen does not exist. There are no other worlds as they cannot be perceived.

Charvakas believe that there are four elements (bhutachatustaya): earth, water, fire and air. Everything is composed of these four elements, and it is the combination of these elements which produces consciousness (chaitanya). Charvakas do not believe in abstract concepts such as vice and virtue, or in causal relationships. They believe that it is the 'essential nature' (svabhava) of a thing to undergo transformation by itself (svatah). Moderate (shiksita) Charvakas, however, say a thing comes into being due to its 'essential nature'. They admit the validity of perception and inference.

According to Charvaka philosophy, sensual pleasure is the only end of human beings. Charvakas do not believe in Hell as a separate state of being but only as earthly suffering. Liberation is the dissolution of the body. Death is the end of all. After death, the body and consciousness cease to exist (na pretya sangjnasti, Brhadaranyaka Upanisad 2.4.12). [Amarnath Bhattacharya]

Without looking at Wikipedia, I would define an atheist as someone who does not believe in a creator deity or any deity for that matter. Quite simple. You can go into specifics like whether its implicit, explicit, strong or weak atheism. For the record, I'm a strong atheist......

........There is also an unorthodox (naastika) school of thought, often grouped together with buddhism and jainism, called Chaarvaak. My philosophy would be very congruent with whatever we know of that ideology.

I would say ur definition (in red above) of an atheist is rather superficial, and would make any true Advaitin an Atheist, incl Sri Shankara himself. Pls come up with a tighter definition. There is rather more to atheism than a mere non belief of existence of deities...

Also Charvak philosophy, as you are prob already aware (see purple text above), acknowledges the existence of Consciousness (chaitanya), proposing that it is the result of a combination of four of the (inert) elements. It never stood the test of time because of the most obvious flaw in it philosophy - how can inert (jad vastu) be the cause of chaitanya. And if its not a 'cause - effect relationship' (which Chaarvaaks do not believe in anyway) but the elements changed themselves into chaitanya, then how can they change themselves back from chaitanya to the four elements at death, when the very consciousness is no more, by virtue of DEATh having happened... and how did the four elements appear in the first place!!???

You may well be an atheist in your beliefs..... and are perfectly entitled to be so ... but i cannot understand your co-relation of atheism with Chaarvaaka philosophy, since you state For the record, I'm a strong atheist......and also My philosophy would be very congruent with whatever we know of that ideology (ie Chaarvaaka)

Nice blog! Keep it coming. Enjoyed the read! [My emphasis =) ]

cheers