You mean Madison Police Dept?
I wonder how much this is āatheist evangelismā or āatheist churchā, and how much itās more of a support group for people who find these issues very difficult to come to terms with? The adverts seem to be telling people that there is a place that they can feel welcome and discuss issues affecting them rather than a place to convert religious people, and the website doesnāt suggest that people will hear presentations on why they should abandon their faith.
The campaign is designed to draw attention to help anyone who might be struggling with issues regarding their faith in Madison, with a special focus on students. College is a time when many young people reevaluate what they believe in. Challenging deeply-held religious ideas can be especially daunting, and AHA is here to help any students who may be struggling with this process. Many students face hardship from their family and friends once they ācome-outā as nonreligious, and we want to let them know that there is a community of like-minded individuals waiting for them.
[quote=ābobtato, post:9, topic:74585ā]
Iām a little wary of capital-A Atheism as something that you sign up to and go to meetings to discuss. To me thatās like joining a special club to talk about how Susan Boyle didnāt drill a hole through the Earthās crust, I mean, I know she didnāt; whatās this actually about?[/quote]
This is why I simply call myself non-religious. Thereās no need for a word for not having an evidence-free belief in say, unicorns. Not believing in unicorns does NOT mean that you and your belief system are defined by ānot believing in unicorns.ā
Use the word āatheistā, and the religious tend to make all sorts of āIf youāre atheist, then you believe _____!!!ā claims. "Atheism is a religion!ā āRichard Dawkins is your Pope!ā Etc.
These two claim are the sort of thing Iām talking about.
I used to think of myself as an atheist, until someone pointed out that while I believe there is no G/god, I also canāt prove that there isnāt one (or several, or many, etc.). I guess I agree with this person that that means Iām agnostic, a āskeptic.ā
Whatevs, I donāt think about it anymore, unless some superstitious jerk shoves the issue in my face. Including politicians who ignore the whole separation of church and state thing.
Maritime Canada, too. At least, all the Nova Scotians I know (n=3) use supper.
The problem is the follower mentality, it is hard wired in the brain. For the people that need that in their lives, it isnāt so easy to leave all of the dogma baggage behind. Having a new āpreacherā tell them everything they have loved their entire life has been wrong is not attractive and is not helpful.
So whobis the sign really for?
[quote=āanon15383236, post:45, topic:74585ā]
I used to think of myself as an atheist, until someone pointed out that while I believe there is no G/god, I also canāt prove that there isnāt one (or several, or many, etc.). I guess I agree with this person that that means Iām agnostic, a āskeptic.ā[/quote]
What about leprechauns or the Great Pumpkin? If you canāt prove that they donāt exist, does that mean that youāre on the fence about the issue? An agnostic about the issue?
I still call theists ātheistsā, even though they canāt prove that their gods exist. For me, it just means that I have some kind of opinion about this issue, not that I believe I have perfect knowledge or that Iām closed to the possibility that the universe could be different from the way I imagine it to be. It doesnāt mean that I want everyone to be atheists either, so if I think any of those points will be unclear Iāll generally go with ānon-religiousā. āNon-religiousā and āagnosticā can have the connotation of being undecided, so thereās no one term that works for all purposes. I do think everyone should be agnostic and sceptical to a certain degree though, rather than having absolute certainty about their beliefs.
It would explain where all my godamn tools go when I put them down. Either that, or hammer-shaped wormholes in the space time continuum are a lot more prevalent than it would seem.
Definitions vary, but a popular and useful concept is that theism is belief in a god, atheism is lack of belief in any god, and agnosticism is the position that you canāt prove god does or does not exist. So, being an agnostic doesnāt mean that you arenāt also an atheist.
Good point! Iām going to save that line for next time.
Remembering: leprechauns . . . the Great Pumpkin . . . Santa Clausā¦
Um, Iām still feeling kinda boxed in by that popular and supposedly useful concept.
No love for the Easter Bunny? For shame, his high holy pagan day is approaching. Best candy of the year!
How so?
One is a position of belief, the other is on epistemology. They are both merely descriptive. How does that ābox you in?ā
I donāt think thatās a popular concept of agnosticism. I think usually people use agnosticism and atheism as mutually exclusive - one is choosing to stay out of the āgod or noā issue, the other is having a firm stance on the side of āno godā (even if you donāt go around asserting it). I call myself an atheist because I know there isnāt a god, not because I have faith there isnāt a god.
Because as I think @RogerStrong implies, those terms all suggest taking the god concept itself seriously. What if one refuses to take it any more seriously than those of the FSM or the Easter Bunny?
I mean, which are you about the Easter Bunny ā theist? agnostic? atheist?
I donāt think that ānon-religiousā implies āundecided.ā It implies ālacking evidence for a claim, does not believe in that claim. Also may not have any interest in the claim.ā
Itās also worth pointing out that āundecidedā is not the same as "unable to change oneās mind when presented with evidence. I once greatly upset an evangelical friend with my response to āWonāt you feel foolish if when you die you find yourself standing before God?ā
My response: āOf course not. Because then I would have reason to believe. Evidence to believe. There would be no inconsistency in my beliefs.ā
edit: missed a word
Wow! Good find. I should have scrolled down a little further when I initially read that link. Did you follow the link that discusses their budget? They have 9 paid staff members! The poster saying they meet in room 224 of Ingraham Hall had me picturing half a dozen college kids, but they are a professional operation.
Iāve seen the belief/provability distinction often but I donāt have any way to prove how popular it is. It is a useful distinction, I think, and in line with Huxleyās invention of the term agnostic.
There is nothing inherent in the term āatheismā that necessitates that the non-existence of god can be proven. And the term was originally used by Hellenist against Chieftains, and Christians against Hellenist, so it didnāt even mean lack of belief in all gods but rather lack of belief of the right god or gods.
I think most people who eschew the term atheist in favor of agnosticism are, in fact, atheists but just donāt want to admit it because they donāt want to be clearly associated with one of the last groups it is still PC to discriminate against.