Archive for atheist
YouTube if you want to: QualiaSoup
Posted by: | CommentsI have been watching some videos on a YouTube channel called “QualiaSoup”, and I found them to be very relevant to my helping define my world views and rejection of religion. I originally discovered the videos several months ago now and wanted to help raise awareness of them due to the fact they so clearly and articulately express the non-religious world view. I find many of the videos personally relevant as they describe quite precisely the thought processes I went through whenever I tried to convince myself there was a god.
I would like to comment on how well put together these videos are. This isn’t someone sitting in front of a camera ranting away like Pat Condell, or some very quick and dirty PowerPoint slides set to cheesy music. These videos have high quality images, which very clearly and explicitly tie into the narrative. The narrative has a very calm and relaxed style, with no sways of emotional tonality, however this does not detract from the engaging and enlightening content.
It affected me in quite a positive way because I could identify with the topics being discussed and have experienced very similar thought processes in my exploration of the various religions which exist in the world. I felt a sense of connection with the narrator because like him I felt no strong animosity when I finally reached the conclusion that religion and superstition was irrational nonsense. I had simply examined the evidence and came to the conclusion that the evidence was insufficient.
The content of videos varies, but carries the same general themes. I particularly liked the first one I ever watched, which was on the subject of open mindedness. The narration describes how being open minded is not the automatic acceptance of what someone tells you and that you need to explore and test all the evidence before leaping to any conclusions (as I did with religion).
It also points out the obvious paradox that an inexplicable phenomenon can be explained by something supernatural. I felt a particular resonance with the view the saying you don’t believe something is not the same thing as saying it is untrue. I find that this is an argument I which presents itself not just in religious discussions, but all the time in everyday life.
The last and most poignant thing I picked up from this video is that some people hold the view that being open minded means agreeing with them even if they don’t present you with sufficient evidence to support the case they are presenting. As Carl Sagan once said “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, and this video articulates the concepts of critical thinking so simply and clearly that I think everyone should watch it.
If you’re religious you may find these videos challenging your beliefs, if you’re non-religious you may find these videos help you understand yourself and your thinking better. If all these videos do is get you to challenge your own thinking, then they have served a positive purpose and helped move you one more step in developing your critical thinking.
I have now watched most of the videos in QualiaSoup channel, and found them to be extremely informative and helpful. They resonate with my own world view, and I would encourage you to visit YouTube and take a look for yourself. I have embedded the “Open Mindedness” video in this article, but there are many others which are of equal excellence.
Are you offended by Atheism?
Posted by: | Comments
What I noticed was that the vast majority of results were not atheists writing about atheism, but either religious authors bemoaning atheism, or atheists responding to the bemoaning of religious authors. Personally I love a good debate, and like most people I will rise to the challenge of arguing my position in relation to religion.What I hear from the religious perspective though, is that atheism is to be feared, because it causes all kinds of evils in the world. One article I came across highlighted, Lenin and Stalin and their murder of innocent people in the name of atheism. Yes they were evil men, and they did evil things, and they were in all likelihood atheists. Does this mean anyone who does not agree with the position of the churches should be branded a mass murderer?
I know of many people who describe themselves as either religious or spiritual who don’t believe that. Some right wing ministers will have you believe that atheists will corrupt your children, simply proving once again how the religious point of view gives way to reason and fact.
Where does all this hostility to atheists come from though? I don’t stand outside my local church on a Sunday berating people for wasting their time talking to their invisible friend. I don’t go banging on their door telling them they’re completely bonkers and that religion is the cause of all their problems. So why is it acceptable for religious people to treat non-believers in this way?
There was much comment around the fact that Obama acknowledged the non-religious in his inaugural speech. Many non-religious people felt this made them an accepted part of their nation, and that they were now valued and equal partners in their country. Whilst many religious commentators made the argument that America was founded on “Christian” values.
I think it is a poor reflection on our society when atheists cannot reach out to one another in a public forum and discuss the issues which affect us. The atheist bus campaign was reviled by many, as an attack on religion, when in reality the intent of the message was to offer reassurance and comfort to non-religious people. The organisers made it clear the ad campaign was in response to another campaign by religious groups which condemned the non-religious to hell. This is pretty hateful and uncharitable message by any standards. How would the message have sounded if you replaced atheist with, black, Muslim, Jew, fat, or gay?
I am saddened that people in our society view atheists so negatively just because we reach out to one another. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to share our thoughts and feelings? Why are the religious so “Offended” because I wear a t-shirt that says there’s probably no-god? It is a fair a logical comment, which you may or may not agree with. You don’t have to like it, but it’s what I believe.
As an agnostic the idea of an infinite god, which knows all, sees all, hears all, and is all powerful seems highly improbably. The evidence I have seen to support the case of this improbably entity is also very scant. Therefore I reason that there probably isn’t a god, and so choose not to focus on that or let it influence my life.
What I can see is that there are human beings, and other animals in the world with which we co-exist. We can make choices about the way we shape our world through our actions, and the outcomes they create for ourselves and those around us. My choice is to enrich myself and those around me as much as I can through compassion, honesty, and integrity. These are values I have developed myself, influenced by those around me. Is it a belief system? Of course it is! Through application of these ideas, I can observe the way these behaviours impact me and other people, and if they create desirable or undesirable outcomes.
My hope for the future is that we can develop a mutual tolerance for all manner of differing beliefs and ideas. I look forward to a day when I can sit side by side with someone who’s t-shirt says “ There probably is a god” without either of us being offended, hateful or fearful of one another.
Atheists Offended? Surely not….
Posted by: | CommentsAn article by the press association yesterday reports that workers at Salisbury town hall should avoid phrases such as “Singing from the same hymn sheet” because it might cause offence to atheists.
After reading this (and having recovered from a fit of laughter), thought to myself what a load of old nonsense. I find that common phrases such as “Bloody hell”, or “For God’s sake”, or even “Singing from the same hymn sheet” are just common language. I am hardly going to be offended by such things, and by the same token I am not offended when I am “blessed” for sneezing. I am equally not offended by people wishing me “Merry Christmas”, or “Happy Easter”.
If I am to be offended, it is when people chide me for not celebrating Christmas, or when we see a pervasive interference in public services by organised religious groups. However a few innocent phrases are hardly likely to make my blood boil.
This sort of censorship also worries me, because it curtails our freedom of speech. Why should we not be allowed to express our joy and frustration in a way that suits us, especially when they are culturally relevant to us?
So as an atheist I would like to extend my sincere disappointment that the politically correct brigade have gone mad once again.
Atheist Bus
Posted by: | Comments
I have to admit when I first read about this campaign in the news I was ready to write a scathing entry in my personal blog. My initial reaction was, “Why oh why do we get into these tit-for-tat battle of words with religion!”. Initially I thought the whole campaign smacked of me-too-ism.
I still dislike the actual slogan itself, because it’s so non-committal and wishy washy, but the thing which has amazed me is the money that has been raised. Every time I check the total has gone up?! It was originally supposed to raise £5500 which would be matched by Professor Richard Dawkins, in order to put a banner on a bus, with some sort of atheist slogan to counter the claims of religion.
Then I heard from a fellow humanist, and discovered that the slogan had to be watered down because of the advertising rules that said it couldn’t be “too fundamentalist”, hence the “probably”.
One blog entry I came across actually made a sarcastic comment about how few atheists there must be because there had only been a few donations. How wrong they were…..
The campaign was launched on 21st October 2008 with a target of raising £5500, and by 10:06am it had raised £59,210, this morning as of 08:45 the total stands at £103,468. The campaign has clearly had an enormous effect, with so many people (including the religious) making donations. I’ve seen comments from Christian’s, Jain’s and all sorts of other faiths. It clearly shows there is some strong feeling against organised religion and its constant intrusion on our daily lives.
It is my hope that this campaign is a success, because it took me years to figure out that I was a humanist. Raising awareness of the non-religious path can only be a good thing. There are so many good, humanists out there who probably don’t know they have a home in our community. This is one way in which we can reach out them and let them know they are not alone.
If you’d like to donate visit the web site http://www.justgiving.com/atheistbus or see http://www.atheistcampaign.org for more information.
Anne Rice born again?
Posted by: | CommentsI
n my daily summary of Google news, one of my favourite authors, Anne Rice, talks to the Kansas City Star about how she’s gone from being an atheist to being religious again.
It’s interesting to me that some people who are affected by traumatic events return to, or find religion. In the article Rice is quoted as saying she can now hope to be reunited with her child at some future point. For someone like me this is simply wishful thinking, and just because she believes in God now, does not change reality of life. All that has changed is her perception of the world around her.
For Anne being an atheist wasn’t easy, and she’s right, for some people grasping what the evidence shows us can sometimes be frightening and scary. In some ways I understand why someone who’s suffered a traumatic event might find religion comforting. The compassionate part of me says we shouldn’t try to convince people otherwise, as long as their innocent faith doesn’t turn to something bitter and twisted.
Has Anne’s change of heart changed my mind about her work? Absolutely not, because I read books written by a brilliant and captivating author. Just because she’s decided she believes in God doesn’t change the fact she’s written some amazing stories.
In some ways it is disappointing that such an intelligent and creative woman has reverted to a belief in the sky fairy. However I ask myself is it better to have a happy and productive Christian life, than a woefully miserable and desperate one as an atheist? However when you look more closely, it is fear and loss that seem to be drivers behind this reversion. This supports the Richard Dawkins argument about religion being promoted through fear. It is remarkable that an attachment to the material world drives people to religion, so that they can maintain some form of attachment after they experience loss. Buddhists talk of not being attached to the material world in order to free ourselves from pain and suffering. Atheism certainly recognises the nature of the world as it is, pain, death, life, joy, all swirling around us.
My school of thought is that without pain how can we know pleasure or joy. I can look at my life and say "One day I will die, and that is the end of me", or I can look at my life and think about the difference I want to make in the world right now. I can’t escape the fact I will die, so why dwell on it? It’s simply a part of nature. The point about atheism being hard isn’t new, and Julie Sweeney really digs into the emotional aspect of this in her audio book "Letting go of God".
I think for people who are students of nature and science we approach these questions with a more empirical mind, and rationalise things with an almost Mr Spock type logic. Perhaps it just takes remarkable strength of character to be atheist? Perhaps for the artistic mind, such detachment is difficult, and so the comfort of religion does away with all the unpleasant reality of the world, and replaces it with a warm comfort blanket of perceived reality (God).
Atheism and Humanism
Posted by: | Comments![j0433180[1]](http://www.edeonline.me.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/j04331801.jpg)
I haven’t written in my blog for a little while now, as I haven’t been very well and life has generally been quite hectic on top of that. However I do subscribe to news alerts on Google which have the word atheist and humanist.
The reason I do this is so that I can keep tabs on what the media was saying about humanists and atheists, for example if Richard Dawkins says something profound which the media picks up on. The only thing that was profound as the amount of pro-Christian articles which simply went on an atheist/humanist bashing rampage.
For example, one article tried to claim that atheists don’t give to charity, a fact I strongly dispute because not only do I regularly give to charity, but I have been swimming for charity, running for charity, and sponsored friends and relatives for charity. I even stood in the pouring rain cheering on a friend running for he Alzheimer’s society having sponsored her. It is not my policy to give to religious charities, because I don’t trust them not to discriminate, however I have given a significant sum to charities I choose to support, such as cancer research.
I’ll admit that I have written articles against religious involvement in public life, and even about my philosophical differences with religion. However I don’t generally hit out at religious individuals with negative personal comments. The atheist authors like Hitchens, Dawkins and Grayling come in for intense bashing by the American media in particular. I myself have suffered insults and condemnation from several people who claim they are Christian.
It is so disappointing that the media can’t find anything to do but attack humanists, and there seem to be no shortage of religious representatives who want to be interviewed. There are a few good journalists out there who report objectively, and I have no problem with being challenged on ethical or philosophical issues at all. In fact I love debating this sort of thing, especially as I’m generally more well versed in religious scriptures that many so called religious people.
However where do we draw the line between honest debate and hate mongering? I don’t object to their right to say what they like in a free society, however it comes down to what is polite and civil. You can call yourself religious, but it is you actions and behaviour on which people will judge you.
Why do I call myself humanist?
Posted by: | CommentsA couple of people who’ve read my profile (and blog) wonder why I call myself a humanist, and so openly. Well the reason is I find it a more positive description of my beliefs and values.
I could easily say, I’m an atheist, or a secularist, or even non-religious. I feel its important to describe myself in a way that doesn’t judge someone elses way of life or values. I’d rather say what I am, than what I am not.
I suppose to someone who isn’t familiar with the term, it sounds like something from the 70’s, associated with hippies and the like. To be honest all sorts of people consider themselves humanists, and it far predates the 1970’s. Just have a read on Wikipedia.
When I talk about being humanist I’m talking about living my life in a positive way, helping people, contributing to society and taking responsibility for my choices and actions.
Humanism isn’t a religion, and I don’t worship the fairies at the bottom of the garden, or Zogg the mighty from Garzax 7. There is no ritual, no doctrine, and no scripture. I suppose some people do take issues with my values is when I express the desire to be free from religion.
Let me clear this up, because I’m a live and let live kind of guy. I have no problem with religion, and I would even die to defend someones right to believe what they want. Being a pacifist I’m not going to kill anyone for you though. All I ask is to be afforded the same right, which is to not have religion influence my chosen way of life.
As I humanist I can work with people of religion when I agree their aims, e.g. curing cancer, saving the rainforests, helping people with HIV. However, if I disagree with religions aims, then expect open criticism too.
So, I’m a happy humanist.
