While browsing the outer reaches of the interweb, I stumbled across something called “Atheist +.” Has anyone heard of this? What are your thoughts and opinions? I looked into it and discovered an interesting blog post on the subject worth a read http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2012/08/atheism-plus-arguments-...

Views: 1034

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I've been reading the blogs over at FtB, especially Blag Hag and Greta Christina.  Noel Plum on Youtube did a good vid on what's been going on over there.  I think I posted his vid here a few days ago...  been busy, and my days are running together.

I like the idea of getting involved with social justice issues, and I see the value of a marketable name.  However, I agree with the opponents of A+ that the name puts the emphasis on atheism, while the '+' stands for a broad array of social justice issues that each have their own ranges of interpretation and application. 

I also disagree with the argument that atheism leads to advocacy in social justice.  I see skepticism and rational thought as leading to atheism when applied to religion, and the same cognitive tools leading to advocacy in social justice when applied to morality.

Finally, after reading the blogs at FtB, I noticed a rather toxic atmosphere of group-think combined with a rather knee-jerk hostility toward any questioning or criticism.  At the rate they are driving away people, I don't see their 'movement' as evolving into much.  I pretty much see them as becoming yesterday's idea pretty fast.

"I also disagree with the argument that atheism leads to advocacy in social justice.  I see skepticism and rational thought as leading to atheism when applied to religion, and the same cognitive tools leading to advocacy in social justice when applied to morality."

If skepticism and rational thought lead to atheism and also to advocacy of social justice, then atheism may not advocate for social justice in your view, but you have just told us that you think they hold the same root and are interlinked.

And I haven't read the blogs except that which Nelson posted in his Sunday School blog. I'm disappointed to hear your observations. :/

If skepticism and rational thought lead to atheism and also to advocacy of social justice, then atheism may not advocate for social justice in your view, but you have just told us that you think they hold the same root and are interlinked.

They're interlinked to the degree that the same tools were used for analysis of each field.  I'm currently working on a project with regards to economics.  When I get done you could say that my views on economics would then be linked with my views on social justice and religion.  While I'd agree that there is some degree of linkage, I wouldn't go as far as saying that my perspectives on atheism are leading to my thoughts on economics.

Atheism by definition is NOT a movement.  .

I personally LIKE atheism+.  I support them 100%.   I hope they grow and go on to do great things!

Let me repeat again... Atheism, by definition, is NOT a movement.  It is NOT a religion.  It is NOT a political party.   It is NOT a club.  It is Not a cult.   People do not need to get all pissy because someone wants to start a group or subset of like-minded individuals within the already hugely diverse group that has as its ONLY binding a 'lack of a god belief'.

 

I'm sure there are lots of atheists that I'd rather not hang out with.. that the ONLY thing I have in common with is a 'lack of a god belief'....  I don't have any problem distancing myself from those people in spite of our shared lack of a god belief.     I also don't think I'd have a problem with joining a group of like-minded atheists in different ventures, charities, politics, discussion groups etc..    

It's because Atheism Plus seems to be being set up in contrast to, rather than in complement to, Atheism.

Any implication that in order to be a "proper" atheist you must also advocate X, Y, and Z--issues which have nothing to do with belief or non-belief in god, quite frankly, is asinine if not outright dickish.

If that's what these people are doing they can fuck right off.

Well said.

From what I've understood, they aren't saying that to be a "proper" atheist you have to do X, Y, and Z. It's just that they want to be recognized as Atheists who also stand for X, Y, and Z.

What is being said is that some atheists are better - more moral - people than others and that there are reasons to prefer more moral atheists than less moral atheists.

Do you disagree with this?

If you disagree, why are you putting so much energy into condemning those atheists that you disagree with? It is pretty much like saying that "Atheists who do not morally judge other atheists are morally superior to those who do."

You do not morally judge other atheists?

If an atheist blogger was caught buggering young boys in the shower, you would shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, but he's an atheist. The rest doesn't matter?"

If an atheist actually does rape another atheist with a knife, your judgment is, "Well, he's an atheist. We must judge him."

If he walks into a church and starts shooting into the congreation, or hijacks and crashes an airplane into Notre Dame, or kills his young daughter because she asked to say a prayer at supper, would you cheer him because, at least he is an atheist, and there is no such thing as a bad atheist?

Remember when atheists condemned moderate religions for providing a smoke screen for religious fundamentalists? We called upon religious moderates to condemn religious fundamentaliss - it was the right thing to do.

But not here? Not among atheists?

That sounds like the words of a hypocrite.

How is it that there can be better and worse theists, and theists that other theists should reject - but not better and worse atheists - or atheists that other atheists should reject?

Now, there is always going to be a debate over where to draw this line.

Get used to it. It is a part of reality. An inability to deal with this part of reality in a mature manner means dealing with it in an immature manner. And simply denying it - or closing one's mind to truths one does not want to admit to - has its own problems.

Get used to it, as I said. We're going to be living with this fact for a long time.

Spoken like a true theist.

Is this sort of thing actually happening or is it more like hyperbolic characterization for humor purposes? How true is this sentiment?

RSS

Blog Posts

PI = 4

Posted by _Robert_ on September 16, 2014 at 8:53pm 2 Comments

Invictus

Posted by Marinda on September 11, 2014 at 4:08pm 0 Comments

Ads

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service