|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 10/04/2007 : 11:39:11 [Permalink]
|
| Gorgo, you have no issues being lumped in with all of the atheists who worsip the sun, moon and the number 3? I for one cant stand it. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/04/2007 : 12:33:59 [Permalink]
|
I do like being lumped any way that I can.
Being human lumps me a lot of ways as well, but it does not mean that I'm not human.
I think the term skeptic covers a lot of area. Naturalist covers some ground, too, but I don't know if that covers my ground or not. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
 Posted - 10/04/2007 : 14:07:10 [Permalink]
|
On some level I agree with Harris. His argument is a subtle one, but he's trying to shift how atheists and, more importantly, I think, non-atheists conceptualize things. In this respect, his comment about astrology is apt.
When a person defines herself as being not-X as opposed to just X, the conceptualization seems (to me, anyhow) to be that X is the mainstream accepted thing, and I can only express myself and my minority view in terms of that mainstream accepted thing.
It's a semantic fight and I for one have bought into it. Or most of it. I don't think of myself as an atheist as much as a person who doesn't believe in religion. And while I consider myself a skeptic, I've leanred that they term is broad and in fact, most people are to some degree or other a skeptic about something. Plenty of good Christians could come here and argue against things like UFOs, ghosts, and 9/11 conspiracies.
Anyhow, I'm getting off-topic. But I don't think that Harris is quite so wrong, even if I'm fairly sure that he's fighting a losing battle. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/04/2007 : 16:11:38 [Permalink]
|
I see Harris' point, but still think he's wrong. Especially at a time when "atheism" has suddenly, partly due to Harris himself, become a hot topic at last. Many people, especially the educated young, are coming out to support it. It's gathering momentum in large part as a reaction to the Bush theocracy.
Not using the term "atheist" would have the effect of blunting the momentum of the New Atheism. It would also appear to many to be a cowardly retreat. I'm sure that's not Harris' intention, but that's how many, atheists and theists alike, would see it. I refuse to stop using it as a self-description. I'm proud to be associated with atheism.
"Skepticism" is a related word, but not exactly the same thing. For one thing, some real atheists are complete woos on other issues. (To me, believing in "spiritual" things runs against my skeptical nature as much as does belief in a formal god(s). I'm not only an atheist, but a critic of all religions, and movements that walk and/or quack like religions. This includes those which have no obvious anti-social or anti-science agendas. At best, they are wastes of time, money, and/or gray matter.)
On the other hand, a person can be a skeptic in limited areas, even remaining a theist or deist, though I think that limits their skepticism to an equal degree.
So I think we do need a name for the reality of atheism. And "atheism" seems to me to be at least as good as any other term. In my own world view, it could be defined as skepticism applied to gods.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 10/04/2007 16:14:50 |
|
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 10/04/2007 : 17:56:03 [Permalink]
|
Back in my previous incarnation here a few years back I'm sure I posted my thoughts on this, but it's probably lost so I'll try again with a very brief synopsis.
I haven't felt comfortable with the term 'atheist' for quite some time. The very definition seems to presuppose the existence of a god that I choose not to believe in, which doesn't fit my views. It's also a very negative term, describing me in terms of what I don't believe in rather than what my actual philosophy is. That's why I usually describe myself as a 'naturalist'. I only look for and accept natural explanations for the universe around me. |
Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II
Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 12:11:20 [Permalink]
|
PZ offers his thoughts on Harris' comments: Letter to a Non-Atheist New Atheist. As usual, I'm pretty much in complete agreement.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 12:36:28 [Permalink]
|
Like PZ said. To Hell with going under the radar. I don't want atheism to become "The Movement Formerly Known."
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2007 : 14:00:10 [Permalink]
|
Huh?
Here is a way of separating my position from those of my fellow atheists who insist that there is power in a label. Let's call it the “press conference test”:
Imagine President Bush announcing his veto of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research at a White House press conference. A reporter for a major television network can ask one of the following questions. Which would you choose to best strike a blow against religious ignorance in this country?
1. Mr. President, what rational basis is there to worry about the fate of three-day-old human embryos? These embryos do not have nerve cells, much less the nervous systems they would need to suffer their destruction on any level. Your veto, frankly, seems insane to any educated person, and it is painfully obvious that it was the product of religious metaphysics and superstition—not science or morality. Do you ever worry that you may be dangerously misled by your religious beliefs? What can you say to the tens of millions of Americans whose suffering will be needlessly prolonged by your faith-based thinking?
2. Mr. President, as an atheist, let me ask what rational basis is there to worry about the fate of three-day-old human embryos? These embryos don't have nerve cells, much less the nervous systems they would need to suffer their destruction on any level. Your veto, frankly, seems insane to millions of atheists in this country, and it is painfully obvious that it was the product of religious metaphysics and superstition—not science or morality. Do you ever worry that you are failing to represent the interests of millions of atheists who also vote, or that you may be dangerously misled by your religious beliefs? What can you say to the tens of millions of Americans whose suffering will be needlessly prolonged by your faith-based thinking?
Which question would you like to see asked on the evening news? To my mind, (1) is clearly better than (2). Much better. And yet, many atheists are behaving as though they prefer (2).
|
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 10/08/2007 14:01:53 |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2007 : 11:21:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Huh?
Here is a way of separating my position from those of my fellow atheists who insist that there is power in a label. Let's call it the “press conference test”:
Imagine President Bush announcing his veto of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research at a White House press conference. A reporter for a major television network can ask one of the following questions. Which would you choose to best strike a blow against religious ignorance in this country?
1. Mr. President, what rational basis is there to worry about the fate of three-day-old human embryos? These embryos do not have nerve cells, much less the nervous systems they would need to suffer their destruction on any level. Your veto, frankly, seems insane to any educated person, and it is painfully obvious that it was the product of religious metaphysics and superstition—not science or morality. Do you ever worry that you may be dangerously misled by your religious beliefs? What can you say to the tens of millions of Americans whose suffering will be needlessly prolonged by your faith-based thinking?
2. Mr. President, as an atheist, let me ask what rational basis is there to worry about the fate of three-day-old human embryos? These embryos don't have nerve cells, much less the nervous systems they would need to suffer their destruction on any level. Your veto, frankly, seems insane to millions of atheists in this country, and it is painfully obvious that it was the product of religious metaphysics and superstition—not science or morality. Do you ever worry that you are failing to represent the interests of millions of atheists who also vote, or that you may be dangerously misled by your religious beliefs? What can you say to the tens of millions of Americans whose suffering will be needlessly prolonged by your faith-based thinking?
Which question would you like to see asked on the evening news? To my mind, (1) is clearly better than (2). Much better. And yet, many atheists are behaving as though they prefer (2).
|
|
Well I see his point.....but I think he missed the point to begin with. I don't think anyone is arguing that we should run around announcing our atheism at every opportunity. Clearly question #1 is the better way do go about it; I don't think PZ or anyone else would argue otherwise. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 08:38:35 [Permalink]
|
| Oh great, a semantic debate |
 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 09:47:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Oh great, a semantic debate
|
You say that as though the words we use and their meanings have no importance. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 23:36:37 [Permalink]
|
if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, who cares what it's called?
BTW that's a rhetorical question. |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2007 : 01:08:37 [Permalink]
|
It is a semantic debate, but I think one can see its importance.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2007 : 11:32:12 [Permalink]
|
Halfmooner.....
For a Bright Pumpkin Bumpkin, you are my kind of guy!
The pain in Vain is mainly in the name!
But isn't there some merit in the Stealth Bomber approach? I mean, if we had 5000 real undercover experts in Iraq instead of 300,000 foot soldiers, we'd be out of there and back where we belong in no time! And a Skeptic by any other name (like Fundamentalist) can do far more damage to their idiotic hypocrisy than he can by standing up to their slings and arrows and by opposing, get discredited! Or shut out!
I am pretty sure that, by pretending to be a Republican, (I was, in my callow, shallow youth) and progressively pointing out Bush disasters imposed on the stone-crazy Right, I have converted my sister and brother in law to becoming Independents. I'm working on several religious friends now, by posing as a god-fearing fundamentalist who is obviously nuts! |
| Edited by - bngbuck on 10/20/2007 11:48:09 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The Problem with Atheism
