Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Apparently, there is a growing movement within the Atheist community called "Atheism +". The basic premise is to assign a set of values that many Atheists share and to unite in promoting those causes. For example, some basic tenets are:
Fighting for gay rights
Feminism
Science Education
Environmentalism
Civil Rights
I don't necessarily have a problem with any of the above. I'm an ardent supporter of all the things above and if such a thing as an "Atheist+" candidate ran for office, I'd probably really deeply consider voting for him or her.
However, I also have this "icky" feeling about it. I don't like group think. I don't like the concept of joining a group under a common set of causes. It always has the appearance of a "slippery slope" where once you're part of the group, no matter what they decide to come up with, you're committed to it. Whether the reality of this is true or not, does anybody else feel the same way? What are your thoughts on Atheism Plus? Are there other Atheists here who really have a hard time digesting the concept of organizing under a common banner of causes?
I had to look up this "Atheist +" thing, and quite frankly, it just seems like someone's rebranding project. There are already non-theistic worldviews that are essentially the same idea like Humanism, Freethought or Skepticism. I don't think inventing another one and attempting to conflate it with Atheism is useful in the least. There are already plenty of labels and movements, just use one of those. Or not. I personally like Atheist the way it is because it doesn't have the political and cultural connotations (or at least shouldn't).
Apparently, there is a growing movement within the Atheist community called "Atheism +". The basic premise is to assign a set of values that many Atheists share and to unite in promoting those causes. For example, some basic tenets are:
Fighting for gay rights
Feminism
Science Education
Environmentalism
Civil Rights
I don't necessarily have a problem with any of the above. I'm an ardent supporter of all the things above and if such a thing as an "Atheist+" candidate ran for office, I'd probably really deeply consider voting for him or her.
However, I also have this "icky" feeling about it. I don't like group think. I don't like the concept of joining a group under a common set of causes. It always has the appearance of a "slippery slope" where once you're part of the group, no matter what they decide to come up with, you're committed to it. Whether the reality of this is true or not, does anybody else feel the same way? What are your thoughts on Atheism Plus? Are there other Atheists here who really have a hard time digesting the concept of organizing under a common banner of causes?
My feeling is that we haven't yet seen the real Big Picture. Instead of trying to form an alliance of various pressure groups, we have to see that that a rational and logical worldview is the one that encompasses everything we want - tolerance, reason, science, social rights.
A global worldview based on reason. We are a subset of that. We are not a worldview in ourselves.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-03-2012 at 01:26 PM..
To my knowledge, Atheist Plus, or A+, is a "reaction" to Richard Dawkins' brand of new atheism. As a biologist, I respect Dawkins' work as a scientist. However, I do not agree with the notion that his views on atheism should have become the de facto manifesto for many. I find it refreshing to have a conversation about atheism where Dawkins is not mentioned once. A+, though, is seemingly railing against the "all boys club" that comprises the atheists' movement's heavyweights.
The A+ idea is extremely new. It's basic premise is one of Liberal Atheism that directly challenges the chains and binds of Religion. I agree with most of the tenets, but it is a rather extreme idea that essentially declares you are either with us or against us. And if you are with us, and we have an issue with you, then you are out.
Here is a link to the original blog post by the woman who supposedly started it all.
I support the values. I am a Unitarian Universalist and we have seven principles our congregations support. I am fine with that.
But, concerning "Atheism +", I would prefer that the term "atheism" not be used, as it causes confusion. Uninformed people already claim atheism is a religion and it takes faith to believe in it, etc. They speak of atheist values, etc. We don't need this "atheism +" coming along to muddy up the water and make it harder for us to set the record straight.
I support the values. I am a Unitarian Universalist and we have seven principles our congregations support. I am fine with that.
But, concerning "Atheism +", I would prefer that the term "atheism" not be used, as it causes confusion. Uninformed people already claim atheism is a religion and it takes faith to believe in it, etc. They speak of atheist values, etc. We don't need this "atheism +" coming along to muddy up the water and make it harder for us to set the record straight.
Atheism is simultaneously a movement and not a movement. It is a movement in the sense that groups, organizations, and individuals attempt to define what it means to be an atheist. Just as with the various branches of Christianity, the various ideas of what it means to be an atheist are just as diverse. By attempting to have some sort of central organization, it does give the impression that atheism is a Religion, cult, etc. It is not a movement because for the most part it is simply defined as an unbelief/nonbeliever in God/god/gods. There is no real philosophy behind other than one can be good without God.
I think there is room for atheists to unite under common ground, yet hold caution when one group pits itself against another.
As for myself, I have said that as an atheist I have faith. That is because even though I have no way of knowing 100%, I do not call myself an agnostic or an agnostic atheist because I hold faith in my atheistic beliefs to be true.
If people feel the need to band together with other atheists to support their atheist belief system they are no better than religious people.
The goal should be to rise beyond the need for a church or god, not invent a new flavor of the same thing. That's why we have umpteen different religions already!
Apparently, there is a growing movement within the Atheist community called "Atheism +". The basic premise is to assign a set of values that many Atheists share and to unite in promoting those causes. For example, some basic tenets are:
Fighting for gay rights
Feminism
Science Education
Environmentalism
Civil Rights
I don't necessarily have a problem with any of the above. I'm an ardent supporter of all the things above and if such a thing as an "Atheist+" candidate ran for office, I'd probably really deeply consider voting for him or her.
However, I also have this "icky" feeling about it. I don't like group think. I don't like the concept of joining a group under a common set of causes. It always has the appearance of a "slippery slope" where once you're part of the group, no matter what they decide to come up with, you're committed to it. Whether the reality of this is true or not, does anybody else feel the same way? What are your thoughts on Atheism Plus? Are there other Atheists here who really have a hard time digesting the concept of organizing under a common banner of causes?
The part of your post I bolded sounded like organized religion, a great evil.
As an atheist I enjoy NOT belonging to any group, I don't like "group think".....independent thinkers create atheists/atheists are independent thinkers.....so NO to groups....leave that to the WEAK who need to belong
The part of your post I bolded sounded like organized religion, a great evil.
As an atheist I enjoy NOT belonging to any group, I don't like "group think".....independent thinkers create atheists/atheists are independent thinkers.....so NO to groups....leave that to the WEAK who need to belong
I agree with you. I don't see atheism as any kind of belief or non-belief system. It is quite simply a lack of belief in god and associated rituals and religions. As such, any values held by atheists are not as a result of being atheists but rather are formed by other means. So I really don't see how atheists could coalesce around a shared set of values.
I have often seen attempts to make atheism 'something more' than just a lack of god -belief (sometimes renaming it - 'non-theism', for example) and it always ran into problems. It's best to stick with what it is and people can bring their own particular isms along if they want.
I bring along Bible Criticism. Dawkins brings along Biology. There is no room for 'my ism is better than yours'.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
