In my previous articles on atheism, I have made the case for the need for atheistic thinking in the healthy human mental process, while also averring that atheism per se is not a worldview. In my last article on atheism, "Why debunk atheism?," I discussed how the theist versus atheist debate is neverending and often descends into ad hominems, with both sides calling each other "fools," for example, and worse. I further expressed my personal thesis on reconciling these seemingly disparate concepts causing so much frustration, grief and sometimes great glee in many parts of the world these days. My "solution" proposes stepping outside of the labels and boxes and being neither a devout theist nor a fanatic atheist. This perception of reality allows for whatever thought is most appropriate in any given moment, rather than forcing a stand of thinking one way or another all the time.
John Cleese, "Meaning of Life"
Although I most definitely take a strong stance on a variety of issues that occur in third-dimensional reality, I am not much of a club joiner. I love community, but so far the clubs being offered have not been my cup of tea. For example, I didn't care much for church, even though the minister and everyone else were quite lovely, righteous and nice people. It was just a rather boring affair, and I was not particularly interested in the ancient Jewish history being taught. Even back then I suppose I saw the whole thing as rather culturally biased. Who really cares who brought the butter dish to Balshazar and the tent peg to the house of Rashomon?
So I didn't really fit in with that club, clique or cult—not my bag, baby. But that's really all there is community-wise when you grow up in a country that claims to be about 80% Christian. Since then I've been creating my own community of likeminded individuals, but we are still lacking any kind of formality. It's rather an affair of hit or miss in the moment, which may be appropriate, in consideration of my definition of freethought.
For these reasons, I tend to recoil when I read words like the following from an article by Ariane Sherine called "Atheism's Open Door," in the Guardian UK:
Andrew Brown is wrong: atheism isn't about class. Anyone can join our club if they don't believe in God.
Ms. Sherine then goes on to recount the gist of another article in the Guardian, "Snobbery with godlessness," which assailed atheists as being snooty and conceited. Interestingly, Brown himself is purportedly an atheist, so this debate now is between atheists.
Thought police at the door?
I can relate to Brown's position, as it turns out that his grievances are much like my own regarding atheism and "militant atheists." And that is why I don't really want to join their supposed "club," because it comes across as being, well, militant, as well as unpleasant. I have been on the receiving end of abusive language from not only theists but also atheists on more than one occasion. I've had pushy people insist that I begin to call myself an atheist, even though I do not subscribe to such a label. In other words, I'm being forced into the club whether I like or not, and whether or not other members like me. I've also been told that in order to join a particular group supporting ex-Muslims, I would have be an atheist. While I would certainly have no intention of proselytizing ex-Muslims into Christianity or any other religion, I'm not too keen on being profiled by the thought police of any camp.
Let's put it this way: When it comes to the god of the Abrahamic religions, I am as atheistic as anyone can be. The pathological character that has manifested itself in the pages of the Bible and Koran is absolutely disgraceful and needs to be categorized not as the god of the cosmos but as a minor, petty thane and tyrant emanating out of the mind of a particular ethnicity that lived in harshness and brutality. Is this wretched portrayal really the best we can do in our day and age?
Even Christians are atheists when it comes to the god of Islam or the many divine aspects of numerous other cultures, from ancient times to modern. Can Christians now join the Atheist Club, since they are essentially atheists when it comes to everyone else's god? Muslims must be defined as atheists as well, since they refuse to recognize Jesus Christ as the divine son of God.
Any club I would want to be in would be so loose in its criteria of what we can do within the privacy of our own minds that it wouldn't really be much of an organization at all. In consideration of the recently publicized fact that there are increasing numbers of Americans who reply "none" to the question of religious affiliation (thusly called "Nones"), yet they do not consider themselves "atheists," it would seem that my "club" is burgeoning. If we factor in all the world's people who can live in peace and harmony with each, and enjoy each other's varying perspectives of reality—regardless of whether they deem themselves theists or atheists—my club is very large indeed.
Sources & Further Reading
Atheism's open-door policy
Snobbery with godlessness
Is atheism the answer?
What is a Mythicist?
Comments
About to continue reading the article but thought I should quickly state, before I forget, that you a little mistaken regarding the use of the term ad hominem, Acharya. There are two different senses to the latin phrase meaning "to the person" - yes there are other meanings like "against the person". In the first sense, the ad hominem argument is a legitimate demonstration of an oponents inconsistency. As in if someone argues that all killing is morally wrong but then later argues in favour of the death penalty. To argue against the person in such a circumstance would be legitimate even to call the person a fool for their blatent inconsistency. In another sense the move against the person is a fallacy or is the ad hominem fallacy if the move is against something personal about the person that is not relevent to the matter at hand. Calling someone a fool because they happened to have revealed an inconsistency in your arguement would be a fallacious move not mutually exclusive of...
Okay, other small problem I have here is that "atheist" is merely a predicate. Not a club. Like if something is said to be red in colour it does not mean it belongs to club red. Atheism is merely an attribute or quality. The same applies to theist and theism. Neither could possibly be "clubs".
While there are atheist clubs and Humanist clubs, atheism itself is not a club. It is a label which is used to group together those who lack a belief in any deity. Does that label fit you? There is one simple question which as it turns out is binary. Do you believe in a deity or deities?
While some people don't like the label "atheist" that has no baring on whether or not the label is accurate. When asked if I an white, I can't simply opt out of my skin color. Theism and atheism are a little different in that people's beliefs can and do change. But the point here is that the label has a meaning. Whether you like the label or not has no baring on whether you fit that meaning or not.
Acharya, I get it.
Incidentally, I understood the context of your use of "ad hominem" in a "ad hominem abusive" sense.
Lady tries to express a philosophical position and the language police jump on her - and not in a fun way!
Lighten up, people, and read what she's SAYING.
Pigeonholes are for pigeons.
We are all in one club, and that is the human club, but what we should strive for is to be in the ‘humane’ club. Some labels we cannot avoid, because they are given to us whether we like it or not. Labels are used to distinguish ethnicities, political views, religious views, and even psychological states of mind. I am Latino because that is the label that others use to describe me; I prefer to think of myself as an earthling. But unfortunately language depends on the use of certain labels. Would the people who reply none to religious affiliation, if asked what their beliefs are, do you think they would reply none? I don’t think so, because we all have beliefs including atheists. They may not be religious beliefs but we all believe in some form of way of life, or way of conduct or personal views about existence. I don’t go around calling myself an atheist anymore but I don’t go around denying it when labeled as one. That’s really the only time people should even consider accepting that
...continued
word, when society labels them as such for lack of a better word that describes them completely. Atheist has become a dirty word, but we can’t go around running away from every dirty word that people throw at us, sometimes you just have to stand your ground and say “Yeah so what.”
Pastafarian: "Lady tries to express a philosophical position and the language police jump on her - and not in a fun way!" - -
Er, lol, you got it the wrong way round. Philosophy is the examination of what people say to determine whether they are actually saying anything meaningful or are just trying to say something meaningful. I understand very well that Acharya is trying to express various view points, worthy of consideration, some of which come through, but on a philosophical level there are, so far, too many errors of reason which need attention. I certainly appreciate what Acharya does - please do not think I am "jumping" on her words here willy nilly - I am sincerely trying to help her get closer to where she's going :)
What part of the following did you not understand?
"And that is why I don't really want to join their supposed 'club,' because it comes across as being, well, militant, as well as unpleasant. I have been on the receiving end of abusive language from not only theists but also atheists on more than one occasion. I've had pushy people insist that I begin to call myself an atheist, even though I do not subscribe to such a label."
"...on a philosophical level there are, so far, too many errors of reason which need attention."
Sorry, Marc, but I completely disagree with this rather disrespectful assessment of my worldview. Your ANALytical musings are not only rude but also fallacious, in my opinion. You are insulting someone in you puerile attempts at being clever and oneupmanship. With your derogatory comments, you are perfectly exemplifying the definition of "militant atheist," I'm afraid.
Now the following is a clever commentary - and one that made me laugh. And THAT'S what life is all about. Not philosophical p*ssing contests.
"Lady tries to express a philosophical position and the language police jump on her - and not in a fun way!"
Marc O'Brien said "on a philosophical level there are, so far, too many errors of reason which need attention...I am sincerely trying to help her get closer to where she's going"
Wow, could you possibly be any more arrogant & conceited, Marc? Acharya has written over 2,000 pages in 5 books to date. I don't think she needs your socially retarded guidance. Except, of course, you are being a PRIME EXAMPLE OF A MILITANT ATHEIST!!! So, in that sense, yes, you are a big help. So, keep pushing your particular brand of mental masturbation known as "new atheism" that is an utter turn-off to atheists like myself. You're just not as intelligent as Acharya S - all you've done here thus far is prove her point.
I agree with what you are saying completely. I don't like labels at all, and I am actually turned off by the antics of some militant atheists. Some appear to have an ax to grind, and that puts them into the same league with the Abramaniacs, who have limitless axes to grind. In fact, that is the main reason I left the faith 12 years ago -- all that religious hate was wearing me out.
Acharya S. I can understand you not wanting to join a club or group of people in the name of God or no God. Atheisim is not a group per se and yet we all like to be around people that have kind of the same feelings and ideas somewhat. I know I like to feel like I belong as far as people accepting me for me and all. I would not want to force anybody into anything for any reason. I am an atheist because of my own ideas on things from the bible and many storys that people say that have happened and yet cannot show anybody or prove anything. Also I have never been pushy about it and I have been angry by how theists want you to be like them and they get pushy with there feelings of what they think exists. Imaginary is all it is.
I would never join any club that would allow me to be a member!
~~ Groucho Marx
:)
Acharya, you're pretty knowledgeable with regard to the subject matter of your books. Whether you are 100% accurate is of no concern to me. The general theme is obviously correct and only the details here and there might be wrong. But the reason I am commenting here is because you are clearly, speaking philosophising skills, a light weight. I am a little embarrassed that you utterly fail to realise this - so poor, in the context of this articles subject, is your capacity for clear thought. Too, there is no need for you to assume a militant position against "atheists". Your position is as absurd as the angry Scotsman who insists that he are not British. Next you'll be telling aliens you're not human giving the reason that to be human is to have the tendency to be religious. I know you are sincere unfortunately sincerity is not enough - you also have to be right and so logically correct. I'm not interested in any pi**ing contest - you either care to learn or continue to fail.
Marc, thanks for proving her point again. So anyone who disagrees with you is "poor in clear thought?" What a bunch of BS. Your mentality is the one that is fogged, because you can't see outside of your own box.
Acharya, you're spot on and clear as a bell. This jerk has proved your point about nasty, militant atheists who feel the need to insult others into their cult. Marc is an embarrassment to all decent atheists.
Marc, since you are a prime example of a militant atheist I'm sure you'll be back with more insults proving Acharya's absolute clarity and point again. You seem incapable of debating these atheistic issues w/o insults demonstrating the utter weakness of your arguments and position. You help Acharya make the case for why many want nothing to do with any atheistic club. Including atheists like myself. So, thanks for all of that.
Marc,
You seem like a psuedo intellectual who's gone astray with your knowledge. Acharya is perhaps the leading 'religious archaeologist' in the world today. If you know of one clearly better, please inform us. Equal is not better. Give yourself a
hug and relax!
Jon Rappoport: "You seem like a psuedo intellectual who's gone astray with your knowledge..." I patiently await a demonstration of how or where I have gone astray. Now, Acharya's errors in reason are two fold - Incorrect use of the term Ad hominem and the term Atheist. Her error is on par with stating that 1+2=5 and 2*3=apples. And your error is in thinking that anyone who corrects such errors is not simply a laymen pointing out an arithmetic error and secondly a category error but is instead a Freemason or, what was it, an Illuminati, hang on, of course, I remember now, only a theist would point out such obvious errors in arithmetic. A laymen would never be so fussy, would they? Oops, sorry, I meant Atheist, only an militant atheist would be so pedantic about such arithmetic error. Acharya should stick to her subject where she does know a little but when it comes to philosophy or logic or thermodynamics or fluid dynamics I would recommend she keep well clear - this article is why.
hey marc, if you're part of club atheist, I don't want to join. your reasoning is ridiculous, and you keep raising up straw men. sorry, pal, but you're not even in the same class as acharya, so just give it up, little man. it's not even acharya's definition of atheism, so there's one inaccuracy you just can't get right. and your point about ad homs is just stupid. have you even been in any forums? people use the term all the time. guess you better get busy policing all those forums and showing off your superior mind.
stick to your legos, and leave the big topics to others.
oh i should add - acharya knows only a "little" about her subject?! that's such a ridiculously inaccurate statement that i can't even give you any credibility at all with the rest of your mindf***ing. have you even read any of her work?
this subject isn't yours to own, mr. militant atheism. blecch. you leave a bad taste in my mouth about atheists. THIS is what you can expect if you say you're not an atheist. i can see exactly what she's saying. she makes perfect sense.
I do believe Acharya knows a little about her favourite topic. Remember, I'm from England - that's how we talk. Secondly, there is no club atheist - I'm sorry, but atheism is a predicate - end of story. Thirdly, if someone is wrong about something then telling them so is no insult and neither does calling such an insult reverse the right/wrong mode of the matter in error. Further, if someone tells me all they need are 12 eggs and 2 loaves of bred then they have enough for the meal and that 2 people brought them 4 eggs each and 1 person brought them a sack of wheat and so they have enough for the meal, well, I would remind them that 2 lots of 4 does not make 12 and a sack of wheat is a different category to a loaf of bread - and so they are in error. How foolish do you think it would seem to me if they started calling the insult card and to top it also mentioned that I know nothing about motor mechanics but the person collecting ingredients for the meal did. Just absurd and childish.
Hey Chaps,
Ok firstly. Atheism is always defined in different ways. Luckily being concious beings they both mean the same thing anyway.
Atheism is basically not being a theist.
Atheism(1) lack of belief in Gods- Theism having belief in Gods
You could say that Atheism is also a belief that there are no gods(2)
Not all definition 1 atheists are definition 2 atheists. Rocks for example lack belief (1) however they do not believe there are no Gods (2) as they can't have ANY belief.
That said Humans have self awareness and therefore all (healthy) humans are either Atheists mrk 2 or Theists.
I know some people, like the author find it upsetting being put into a group, sadly though we are all grouped...in many ways.
You are either dead or alive. You are either older then 21 or younger. Doesn't make you less of an individual if you are in one of these groups...and I think this is where the crux of the matter is.
Seems one of my posts has disappeared...oh well, Must be a glitch. ;)
My second part of my post pointed out that not all atheists help themselves.
On this authors 'Freethought' forum, I was banned because I disagreed with one of the mods. They were so militant about the subject that when rational argument failed, they resorted to misrepresenting my points (so much to the point where they copy and pasted comments I had made but altered them [funniest thing of all though was that they left the original posts which showed them up haha]).
When I pointed this out i was of course banned.
So yes I understand why people might not like being put into the same group of people...but they still ARE in the same group.
Muslims do not like being in the same religion as the taliban...but they are.
I don't like what my race did in relation to the rape of africa..but that doesn't change that i belong to that racial group. Luckily however we are not totally DEFINED by the group we belong
Dan B "I was banned because I disagreed with one of the mods. They were so militant about the subject that when rational argument failed"
Oh, you must be "Skitzee2k" who repeatedly called the Mod a liar starting on page 2. From what I see it was you who were quite militant demonstrating the original post accurate. So now you're going to come her and lie about it?
freethoughtnation. com /forums/viewtopic. php?f=5&t=2827
Some people never learn, no wonder you were banned.
Thanks "Veronica", yes, that is my Alias...and unless it has been tampered with I'm sure the forum link will still show my point...including the edited copy and paste and not even having the sense to change my original post.
When I called the mod on it I asked them to either correct their post to reflect what I really said if it was a genuine mistake, they didn't and when they repeated the falsehoods I called them a liar (Someone who deliberately narrates falsehood)..it was an accurate retort.
I continually asked them to withdraw their comments, posting the original undoctored posts to illuminate the differences, but most were subsequently deleted.....
Anyway if you really want to discuss this issue you can email me, skitzee2k@yahoo.co.uk, however this is not the place.
I simply used that as an example when even the self proclaimed 'righteous' turn out to be underhanded.
This however should not burden everyone in that group with a perceived flaw in their argument.
forums.truthbeknown.com/viewtopic.php?t=2827&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15&sid=bd7489c8ebd8ae916f05a62bf09e1b5e
Is the real link to the forum...i can't read it myself..being banned and all, but anyone who wants to can.
Dan B. "if you really want to discuss this issue you can email me"
LMAO! Why would anybody waste their time w/you, you're clearly the liar here. An now you're showing your obsessive compulsive side by bringing your trash over here. Again, I can see why you might be banned from any forum. If fact, I'm going to request that all of your off-topic posts be deleted from here. You are another prime example of a militant fundy atheist trying to PUSH your views on everybody else. It's unpleasant and nobody appreciates it at all. So, go start your own website, forum and go write your own books. Maybe then you'd stop harassing others "Skitzee2k," ah?
freethoughtnation. com /forums/viewtopic. php?f=5&t=2827
Hi Veronica, kettle, Pot, black?
I have not harrassed anyone, I have mentioned no names, I wasn't even the original person to post the forum. You however have been nothing but vomit insults...without citation too.
Each one of my posts has been on topic.
The topic being 'Atheism', my point is that just because some people are overly animated about an idea they believe in, it doesn't mean that the idea itself is wrong. I mentioned the banning incident as it was closer to home and one I know the author knows, about to quantify my point.
Giving out my e-mail address was the quickest way I could see to get venomous people like you to stop wasting space here over an incident that is over and done with.
When judges use previous cases as precedant they are not trying to reopen that previous case, just use its message.
The message is that Atheists CAN be douches...atheism however being a concept that is about 'lack of belief', cannot possibly.
Try to calm down ;)
I enjoy all your articles and even the current generation of androids' mathematical attempts at persuasion in the comments. They seem to remain oblivious to just how silly they come across when they clearly assume that strict logical modes of conversation is the only acceptable mode of communication. I am however grateful that such beings are amongst us. We need a good laugh whilst dealing with such sometimes overly serious subject matters. I'll join you open-bordered and "much more fun than the rest" club any day.
Well let's hope if you ever need any help in anyway by a professional that they don't take on your way of looking at things.
Doctor: it says here that people cannot live without atleast one kidney...ah, I don't believe in rules.
Banker: You had a balance of 5000 dollars and added another 2000.. logically that would mean you have 7000 dollars in your account...but instead, have this bowl of jelly....Oh stop being so rational.
You: E=MC2? Oh stop being so boring...why not :0D =)
I should remind you by the way that creationists laugh at evolutionists, people laughed at Christopher Colombus and I am sure when Einstien told everyone that nothing is still/static, people laughed..
Doesn't change the facts however.
At the end of the day if you got a laugh, well done.
I get my day going slightly quicker. At the end of the day, that's all that matters, our views on such a mundane(+obvious) subject are hardly going to set the world alit, no matter what the facts are.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!