Comments on: Organised Atheism http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/ Friendly outgoing eclectic agnostic seeks one gram of soul Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:29:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Ben Barnett http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/comment-page-1/#comment-2448 Ben Barnett Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:00:39 +0000 http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/#comment-2448 I liked Sam Harris's comments on this topic from the AAI Conference in 2007. I agree that 'atheist' isn't the word we should be promoting, although it is one descriptor we can be comfortable with. Why can't we all just be... Reasonable? When people ask me what I "am", I just say I'm Reasonable. If they press me further, I usually smile and say I'm a Fundamentalist, Evangelical Agnostic. Great blog you've got here. I'd love to get added to your blogroll (and of course I'd do the same). Check out mine at www.createcognitivedissonance.wordpress.com! Ben I liked Sam Harris’s comments on this topic from the AAI Conference in 2007. I agree that ‘atheist’ isn’t the word we should be promoting, although it is one descriptor we can be comfortable with. Why can’t we all just be… Reasonable? When people ask me what I “am”, I just say I’m Reasonable. If they press me further, I usually smile and say I’m a Fundamentalist, Evangelical Agnostic. Great blog you’ve got here. I’d love to get added to your blogroll (and of course I’d do the same). Check out mine at http://www.createcognitivedissonance.wordpress.com!

Ben

]]> By: mark http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/comment-page-1/#comment-1997 mark Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:07:43 +0000 http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/#comment-1997 Yes, atheist does describe the lack of something, so it describes a negative. Some groups are trying to promote th use of the term "Brights". But I disagree over your suggestion that we even need a label. I want to propagate the notion that you can be a moral person and also not believe in god. In order to do that, I have to use the term that people understand. That term is atheist. But I agree that we should not need labels, and that the term atheist is a negative descriptor. But I use it for lack or a better one, and I doubt there is another way for me to meet my desire to propagate my goal, as described above. Yes, atheist does describe the lack of something, so it describes a negative. Some groups are trying to promote th use of the term “Brights”.

But I disagree over your suggestion that we even need a label. I want to propagate the notion that you can be a moral person and also not believe in god. In order to do that, I have to use the term that people understand. That term is atheist.

But I agree that we should not need labels, and that the term atheist is a negative descriptor. But I use it for lack or a better one, and I doubt there is another way for me to meet my desire to propagate my goal, as described above.

]]> By: Richard http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/comment-page-1/#comment-1996 Richard Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:20:39 +0000 http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/#comment-1996 I agree that there probably aren't any better terms (like you, I don't feel secularist, humanist, rationalist, etc. quite describe me), but the word "Atheist" IS a negative one (I don't mean it has negative connotations, but that it describes a negative). Atheist describes the LACK of something, not the presence of something, like other theological and philosophical labels (such as secularist, christian, etc.). While I agree that there aren't any better labels, my point is - why does it need a label at all? We don't give labels to the many other things we might not have (except, perhaps, with "disabilities" - but then, many people frown upon these labels too!), so why have a label for a lack of belief? I agree that there probably aren’t any better terms (like you, I don’t feel secularist, humanist, rationalist, etc. quite describe me), but the word “Atheist” IS a negative one (I don’t mean it has negative connotations, but that it describes a negative).

Atheist describes the LACK of something, not the presence of something, like other theological and philosophical labels (such as secularist, christian, etc.). While I agree that there aren’t any better labels, my point is – why does it need a label at all? We don’t give labels to the many other things we might not have (except, perhaps, with “disabilities” – but then, many people frown upon these labels too!), so why have a label for a lack of belief?

]]> By: mark http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/comment-page-1/#comment-1995 mark Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:41:43 +0000 http://20gramsoul.com/2007/10/21/organised-atheism/#comment-1995 I use the term atheist to define myself simply because it's the best term out there. I don't see it as a "negative". It's just that secularist, humanist, rationalist, and all the other terms don't quite do it for me. And I've outed myself to my friends and co workers because I don't want the myth that morality has anything to do with god. People know me to be moral and decent and they now know me to be an atheist. I use the term atheist to define myself simply because it’s the best term out there. I don’t see it as a “negative”.

It’s just that secularist, humanist, rationalist, and all the other terms don’t quite do it for me. And I’ve outed myself to my friends and co workers because I don’t want the myth that morality has anything to do with god. People know me to be moral and decent and they now know me to be an atheist.

]]>