A couple things. As a common direction and focus, atheists and humanists can agree on the fact that we can be moral good people - without a belief in God - out a simple regard for human dignity, decency and interdependence.
What if "reasonable/rational intellectualism" (my term) replaces all belief in God. The word atheist would be transcended & have no meaning. Perhaps we can see it as a movement to transcend belief in God & transition into a global intellectualize reality.
@mreous333 Atheism would be transcended then because there would be no theism. In retrospect, Harris's argument would be valid. What might be the impact of we see it as a movement away from theism and towards humanism, defending education (which Christianity threatens), intellectualism (which the Bible puts down), etc? When you understand the psychological, intellectual & communication terrorism in the Bible and Christianity, having a stance against it is easy to defend.
A good way to make an Atheist shut up would be to ask tis question.."It takes time to create something right?...well during the big bang that's when time started,however how could something begin when there wasn't any time for something to start? Because before the Big Bang there wasn't any time".
!.Because naturally that's a hard question to answer,being that it provides minor proof for the existence of an intelligent creator.
2.You're writing something. Does it not take time to create that body of literature?So if there was no time to start with,how could the BB be and accident?
1) "it provides minor proof for the existence of an intelligent creator" Says you. You haven't connected those dots.
2) "You're writing something" I am manipulating matter and energy that has existed for approx 13.7 billion years. I don't know where this stuff was "before" then, or if that is even a meaningful concept. (You did not define "create"...)
3) "how could the BB be and accident? " I'm pretty sure I didn't say that.
I always select the "other" option on any site that asks about religion. I believe God is real--in the hearts and minds of his believers, but I'm too well educated to believe the bible to be a true.
But I really would like to join a religion, for the social aspect. I want a place to go to where I can talk with other people about my beliefs and hear theirs, learn new things, be able to talk to people with open minds...
But even among Atheists there are few truly open minds.
@SketchmanQC To believe in a God, we must present valid reasons for doing so that cannot be refuted by science. The common reasons for believing in God, and there are many, are easily refutable with what we know about psychology, sociology and human/animal behavior. Critical thinking and logical consistency in all areas of life is important even to those who believe in God. If you present your reasons for a belief in God, them we can discuss whether or not they are valid and reasonable.
I gotta say Sam Harris is on to something, as I've had completely different and much more productive conversations with people by not triggering their defensiveness of their religion. Which seems to happen, just by saying you're an atheist or non-believer. Also, when you don't stick yourself in a box, you start coming up with much more creative ways to dismantle bad ideas people may hold.
@unclebeen This can be a good way to circumvent their conditioned defenses. And if they call you an atheist, you can easily refute them. An "intellectual rationalist" or "rational intellectualist" would be a good term. Or you can just say you are a human who focuses on reasonable and rational intellectualism.
thank you very much for the quick response. much appreciated as sam harris may be my favorite writer on the subject of theology besides Richard Dawkins, though God is Not Great was a classic so Hitchens may tie him.
@robwayleftw On the subject of theology they are great writers. If we were to talk about Christianity specifically, the best book I have ever read is "A Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible" by Ruth Hurmence Greene. The Freedom From Religion foundation states that no one since Thomas Paine has debunked the Bible like Ruth Greene, and the more you delve into it, the more you realize how full of nonsense the religion is.
The biggest arguement against atheism is this: If God exists, then obvioulsy He's far beyond any human ability to figure out what exactly his make up is. So, if God has decided that He can only be known in a particular fashion (He can do that because He is God), then how on earth can any atheist be proven wrong? If a human refuses to accept the manner by which God Himself has chosen to be known, then nothing can prove the existenced of God.
Feeding all the starving people now will just create more misery later. While it is true we can feed everyone now they will just make more until we can't feed all the starving people. Only then you will have many more starving people. Every species has more offspring than can live. Why do you think we are different? Birth control before conception is ideal. Birth control by starvation and war sucks. There will be birth control though.
Are you saying that "starvation" the only natural form of birth control and obviously this is a terrible thing. The only way to prevent starvation is to use artificial contraception.
Personally I don't see a need to change the name. Atheist isn't an identity it's a characteristic. Atheist "Lacking the trait of believing in god/s" Bald "Lacking the trait of abundant hair follicles on the head." It's just one identifiable trait that has a name. I mean I'm an atheist. I'm also a philosophical taoist. of the two the last is more of an identifying trait. The first is a secondary characteristic of other factors in my life.
Sam Harris is quite right. I am an Objectivist -- in essence an advocate of reason and freedom. I always explain my position as faith versus reason, in general. This often has interesting results, but most people won't explicitly argue against reason. In fact most people think it's a value. So this helps when you go into discussions of faith related topics.
Id like to see people come to terms with the fact that faith and reason are opposed. Some honestly believe they are not.
I posted this on the Harris vid, but it will probably cycle out quickly, so...
1) Sam suggests that we abandon the label of atheist. I'll make the dissenting argument. I do not wear the label of atheist as a badge of honor. Nor do I imagine that it makes me part of a tightly unified group. Given the independent nature of most atheists, nothing could be further from the truth. I also understand how silly it is to invent a label for every single non-belief we have.
2) But Sam is somewhat naive in believing that we can somehow go into "stealth" mode and sneak up on people's fundamental beliefs by abandoning that label. It's a form of re-branding which fools no one. People of faith are experts at re-branding. Witness the evolution from "creationism" to "creation science" to "intelligent design" to "teach the controversy". Islam is re-branded as "the religion of peace".
3) No, people of faith, whatever you may think of their intellectual capacity, are going to do exactly one thing when you propose a framework of reason and evidence vs. a framework of blind belief - they will assign you the label of atheist, whether you proclaim it or not. So I think we gain no tactical advantage in one-on-one dialog. But there's another point I think Sam has missed. We are under attack.
4) From our school boards, to our town councils, to our courtrooms, to the very constitution, we are besieged by people who would see only one book taught in our schools, and a constitution that reads like Leviticus. Politicians have no problem dismissing a bunch of disassociated individuals. But they do pay attention to large groups.
5) After the Civil War, many light-skinned blacks moved north, and did everything they could to "pass for white". While that got them personal success, it did nothing to further the cause of blacks in America. No, it took large groups of black Americans, marching and protesting, to gain rights. Jews, a minority that was discriminated against in America, did not gain rights and acceptance by abandoning the label of Jew.
6) No closeted gay person has done a thing that promoted the notion of gay civil rights in the public eye. Consider this. Out of over 500 elected government officials in Washington, only one professes to be an atheist.
No Sam, the problem isn't that we are labeled as atheist - the problem is that we aren't nearly vocal and visible enough as atheists.
1st time I got called atheist I rejected the name & still do, my thought was that atheists might believe other things that I don't. Something that bugs me is the idea that faith & religion are the same thing. I think that faith has been used a manipulative tool by religions & could/should be kept seperate from religions.
I watched the sam harris argument and its really good, But their is a problem with it and its this. taking his racist example, would it be more likey to here (at the Time rember) someone say "I'm a racist" or "I'm Not a racist" as a defining charateristic, Something sets you apart from others. Thats what the minority has had to do, Think of racisim, Gay people, Womens rights. In order for these people to be heard and to get their arguments and points cross to the other side
They have had to come under a certin banner or name and fight for that cause. As the minority we should seak saflty in numbers and group together because then our voices would be heard by more people and it would have a greater effect. So if we are going to achieve our goals(generaly i think we would all like to see maybe not the removal of relgion but certinly some of its acpests of our society, But no one man is the voice of the people) We need to fight together
If we adopt an anti intellectual or anti erational and stance we are still fighting the same battle. but if you asked say are creationist Do you think your rational in your resoning, Of course they will say yes, yet we know that they aren't. so tactic change is farily useless as thats pretty much is happening know. Also i think we run the risk of dispanding the athesit movement if we dont keep ourselfs as athesits and we might loose support. Instead i think we have to change the perception of us
The yotube community is fairly set in stone i feel. You wont have people like Jesusfreak or The Amazing atheist change sides of the fence. Instead we should focus on the Public. As from what i can tell, the other portrail of atheists on the news and common media is the funny little guy how is on a little rant about the words "under god" on and in certin places. The Genral public has no idea of the arguments and discusions and debates and ideas that athesits are capable of.
The problem is...the reason why these Delusional people don't see the absurdity of their own religion(bible) is because they aren't educated about it! Most of which haven't even read the bible cover to cover or even close. They don't even know that there is a TALKING DONKEY OR TALKING MONKEY...OR BONES OF OTHER HUMAN SPECIES! THEY BELIEVE THE PROPAGANDA THEY HEAR IN CHURCH! THEY HAVE BEEN FORCE-FED THIS GARBAGE SINCE BIRTH..THEY DON'T KNOW NO DIFFERENT!! I SAW THE SAME HARRIS VIDEO..GREAT!!
Nice video! my names Mia, kinda feelin bored if any1 wants to join me on cam or wana chat i will be signed on at __ FriendlyFlirts(.COM) __ my user ID there is Mia_qfalz chat soon xx its FR33 to j0in! mwah
Concerning the Bill Hicks video: Richard Bach wrote a great little book in the 70's, "Illusions" which you might enjoy (or think absolutely trite). It is smarmy like much of the 70's, but the character Don Shimoda talks about human experience using a metaphor about the movies we go to.
Of the secular leadership I probably gravitate toward Sam Harris more than the others. I've actually been touting dropping the label for a couple decades not. I don't see the logic in defining myself in the negative. I mean, there is no other context where we do this. All it does is validate and arm the fundamentalists. Also, it draws a fallacious line between us and all the various fundamentalist sects that are/were coincidentally atheists. The reasons go on and on.
I would just like to reassure the readers and watchers that I know many christians who are tolerant and reasonable. Folks I can converse with rationally even if we don't agree. They don't need to threaten and insult anyone they don't understand. Please don't think ufchomp speaks for all of them.
"you people" meaning atheists, although you are trying to quit saying that word because you now understand what it means are a group of extremist that follow leaders or whatever you call them of an unorthodox sect. Some people just want to be different and rebel against society and some people, sadly enough, rebel against GOd in order to bring attention to themselves. Why the gatherings and the speeches..if you don't believe fine, but nooo, you got to have some attention right?again CULT
So I guess physicists, software engineers, sports fans, video game players, political activists, dog breeders, and boating enthusiasts are all in a cult, too, eh?
If you're going to stretch a word to the point where it can mean anything, then you are communicating nothing - and your words are meaningless.
What's the difference between a 'cult' and a 'religion'?
we don't gather, don't worship, don't make meetings to complain about God. We are individuals who have something in common, we don't believe in religion. I wouldn't care about it if it doesn't affect me, but it does, in science, in politics, in laws etcetera that's why I care. there is no such thing as a lider; every one that thinks his attitude towards religion is not to believe it (atheism) is different, ther's no such thing as an Atheist cult. A cult based about not believing in something? XD
Why do theists just brush of Atheism as just young people rebelling against God? I hear that so much. Do you really believe we're all rebelling just for the sake of rebelling against something? Well, I'm not, and I have a feeling I'm not alone in this. When I was about 12, I stopped believing and discovered science at the same time. For a few years I looked not only at Catholicism, but at many religions. None of them offered any evidence when Science offers quite a bit.
Just wondering. Did you reject the religious beliefs you formally had and then discover science or did your discovery of science influence you to reject those beliefs?
So, after questioning my beliefs and looking at the mountain of evidence science has to offer, accept the scientific explanations for our universe and why everything is what it is. It isn't because I need to rebel against something, it's because the evidence points to that.
I also have been watching all of Sam Harris and have learned so much and like you have revised my own theories and 'beliefs'.I am deffinitelly an atheist, more to the point an anti-theist,but my standing point is this:I hold nothing against theism IF it stays indoors,in churches,in personal privacy,but when it interferes with peoples' safety, science or social progress,sex lives,all that,it needs to be updated,not eradicated, but renewed or altered nonetheless (to fit in society's changes).
The only thing I disagree with is the bit about all humanity coming together...I can't conceive of such a thing happening in any short breadth of time from our present with the world being so full of violent magical thinking.
As far as I can see it, and I think I can speak with a certain degree of neutrality because I was a active catholic, and now I prefer to keep an open view on the world, and accept what science can teach us. I do not firmly believe that there is no God, I accept that for now there can't be a conclusion.
And as I see it, atheist IS a wrong word. I think what you are RabidApe, and most of the people that call themselfs atheists, are trully Humanists. They believe in the power of mankind.
SO, i would like to know your opinion on that, I know I don't make a real argument, it's just a couple of words in a comment, but I'm thinking of making my first video regarding this. So if you think it's worth the trouble, say what you think of my comment.
I can't remember exactly where I heard it but I heard about a campaign to rename atheists as 'brights' - the same way homosexuals had a campaign to rename themselves as gays. Made me smile ^^
Personally, I think labels as a whole are bad, because it assumes that you're kindof.. different from the norm. The same way you wouldn't really go around calling yourself a straight, or a white. Idk. I have positive connotations of the name atheist so.. ah. It'd be wonderful if everyone could think that.
Rabid, I agree with both Sam and yourself on dropping the 'Atheist' term. It makes sense. However when debating religious people on any specific issue there a problem when they invoke the celestial dictator to substantiate their position. One has to learn how to tackle that kind of argument without going down the 'god is a fantasy' route thus avoiding being labelled 'atheist'. Good luck with that. I'm learning it too.
The problem (especially with a lot of Christians) is that they do not want to do any research; they want their pastor (minister, whoever) to tell them what to think. They want the term atheism to explain all there is about the person and it hurts their minds to try and find out about a non-believer.
I disagree with that statement. In my experience christians will do research, but they look only for things that support their beliefs. This sadly sends many of them running into the open arms and plastic smiles of the young earthers and anti evolutionists. Atheists in my experience are way too brutal when talking to christians. I'm guilty of it too. It may not be possible to get a dogged theist to jump ship very often but carefully chosen words can get one to take a step in the right direction.
It doesn't matter the label; when you do not believe in God you are carrying negative conations (baggage) when dealing with theists (especially Christians); so dropping the label will not take away the negative conations.
Not necessarily with theists. Just with religious theists, and no that is not a redundant choice of words. Deists believe in a deity of some kind but attach no value to the act or worship or supplication. This makes them secular theists and with them one does not have this problem.
The point was made decades before Harris was born. Humanists are looking at these conversations and wondering why everyone's acting like these are some new revelations. I guess they are new to many individuals - myself included at one time, and that's great. See americanhumanist dot org and find a local group in your area :)
Harris is an eminent thinker on this subject. He perhaps has thought longer and harder than Dawkins, Hitchens and Dennett. I'm an ex believer of 5-6 years and the world 'atheist' STILL sounds like 'nazi' or 'fascist' to me. Still has an almost malevolent connotation or something devoid of positivity and warmth. So in that respect I agree it's a good idea to ditch the term. Also he's right that we should not form an entity from an essentially non-existent position. Like non-astrologist.
Poor RabidApe ! "Killing no insects". You seem to walk into an Eastern way of thinking ? As long, you will allow me to kill insects and eat beef, pork, life oysters and so on. You question human moral ? Due to gene misfunction, not all people can feel love. Maybe, you have a gene that makes you have 'to reason'. Maybe 600.000.000 people not, so they try and find a God. Not everyone will agree with your vision of 'a better world'.
May post was much longer, but YouTube will not allow. "You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time." - Bob Marley.
I am proud to be 'free from God', 'Theoless', 'No Theo', 'A-Theo', Atheist. Why make a fuzz over a word ?
That's like how some would avoiding using the term "anarchist" because of its very negative connotations in the public's mind.
It could be a stretegy for you but, to be really picky, you can't deny that you are dumbing things down to gain wider acceptance. To be fair, however, its not like many of us are not guilty of that anyway.
I consider myself agnostic. Maybe you want to consider if "agnostic" describe you better.
i watched that video a few months ago and i had the same reaction. my feeling is that you can call yourself whatever you like, you'll still always be an atheist in the mind of a theist. i just don't think you should make a big deal out of it because it's just one aspect of who you are and doesn't define you as a person.
Damn dude, just watched your vid and ended up on a three hour tour around everything from Bill Hicks to Alan Watts. Kick ass!! If asked "do you believe in a spiritual world?", I would reply "No, b/c there is no evidence" rather than "No, I'm an Atheist". Don't get too wrapped up in labels. If some dude named Crapper made the automobile instead of a toilet, we'd be driving Crappers around instead of Fords.
I see two issues here: 1) When you leave a religious community its nice to identify with others more based in logic then the fantastic magic of religious dogma, having a name for those people helps. 2) It seems inevitable that any theist would ask "so you are a atheist?" and at that point its a purely a semantical debate. You can say "I am promoting reason", but they will interpret that to mean you are being less then honest, and they may have a point.
I'm very open to transrational spiritual models (ex. commersialized budhism), and if I find one I agree with, I'll gladly embrace it and this approach shouldn't be attacked by atheists, because it is not their business. As an atheist for now, I shouldn't be looked down on by religious either, it is not bad to be different.
Trying to spread fundamentalism is always a bad idea I think. Great video.
I actually came back and watched this video again, due to how important to you it seemed to be at the end. I agree with you about how we could be spending our money, short of the whole "feeding the hungry" bit. Before you go advocating straight-up charity I would suggest you do a bit of research on the subject. If you go watch some of the TED TALKS videos from recent years having to do with business in the developing world I think it would be really, really enlightening for you about that.
I want to teach people to fish - I don't want to feed them . And we can probably do a lot to fix 'our house' before focusing too much on EVERYONE else.
And the TEDtalks are essential viewing for all homo sapiens, as far as I'm concerned.
"...so yeah." I love those moments where you know you're not going to edit the video, but you know you're fucked because you forgot what you were going to say. Good times.
It is hard if not impossable to have a label that doesn't come with baggage. But I think it is ultimately up to us not to lie down in the chalk out line that others have drawn for us. The same can be said for the theists, christian,muslem, ect, all these lables have baggage.
Then he goes on to mention not borrowing contemplative tools... perhaps building a 'mental telescope', 'non-astrology'???
"Atheism is synonymous with not being interested in what buddah or Jesus "experienced""... duh... I don't imagine you would go on to call yourselves atheists. : )
~31:00 Sam proposes "an alternative to living at the mercy of the next neurotic thought that comes careening into consciousness; alternative to living consciously spellbound by listening to the conversation we are having with ourselves.
"habitual failure to recognize thought as thought; our habitual identification with discursive thought is the PRIMARY SOURCE OF HUMAN SUFFERING"
Being reborn and having a "personal relationship" with Jesus has completely eliminated the very nature of this internalized suffering in my life. The unbound love I feel in my heart from what He did for us gives a whole new meaning to life. Try to internalize an eternal heaven and what that would be like.
I will say however that this chap is my new atheistic "hero". He and I share almost identical views of "perverted labeling" however he reinforces my faith by capturing the very essence of "humanistic suffering"
To edify a secular construct of ideals towards an advanced science bound utopia is "noble?" but imagine a world run by "property dualists". Is it okay for me to presume you do support the advancement of neuroscience? If yes, have you ever thought those science-fiction novels may have warped your brain?
Hey Rabid, I watched the Sam Harris video + Q&A. The very deep and "controversial" ideas conveyed to the "atheist" brethren on introspection and meditation seems similar to achieving a "nirvanic" state.(eudaimonia?)
I was very "impressed" by Sam's fluidity and ability to capture his ideas, however, the foundation of his "proposal" is not ideal by an "intellectual's" very nature. What are your thoughts?
I know ive heard christians try and call aetheisim a religion. I know this bit.
But is that still all that much of an issue anymore? I dont see this issue come around often ; especially lately. Maybe my experience is the exception
it would be really cool if you would make a podcast. since you talk pretty well, and you don't use that much visual aid, I think it would work. think about it.
religious violence is a weak reason for being somehow opposed to religion in general. weird religious (or pseudo-scientific) belief systems are a waste of mental energy.
but still you have to admitt that islam is a threat to the world even if it is not the 'general' if you know what i mean....and of course there is the thing that the main religions are almost as threatening as islam.
If you don't believe in a god you are defined as an atheist.
If you don't like that then to bad. If you don't wish to have the label of atheist then you have two options: 1) Start believing in god. or 2) Change the English language.
Maybe this doesn't help our cause but I'm sorry, thats too bad
Well, in mixed company when I don't want to offend anyone, sometimes I just say "I believe in monkeys" Asin, "funny thing, I believe in Monkeys, but HE'S the sinner" (in reference to my brother, who's a semi-fanatic, a drug adict, a criminal and a convicted fellon. In many ways we're like Superman and Bizarro. I'm Superman.)
By the sound of it, if the only religion in the world was a Jaine, I'd still be an Atheist (it still sounds INTELECTUALLY stupid) but I don't think I'd be anti-reigious. In fact, I'd be doing something else entirely right now.
If everyone were a rigorous Jain instead of other religions, the environment would be treated better. And we'd have a global living wage, and no war. I could put up with that kind of religion i do suppose. I wouldn't approve of the supernatural aspects, but above all i look at the higher good. We can deconstruct belief in supernatural without discarding their admirable values. As non-theists we know good character does not require religion.
Dropping the term "atheist" is an old idea AFAIK. Been talking about it for over 20 years. Sometimes bending is more expedient. RJR changed their name to Altria. Ow, bad example since tobacco is bad.
No religion in general? I'd say they're generally into the supernatural. And Jaines are pretty damn cool, as far as religious folk go. I might rather hang with Jaines than speciesist non-thesists. Mind your human centrality and anthropocentrism there. :-)
I think educating people as to what Atheism means and doesn't mean is much better than not using or changing the word to something else. If we can't show people that the word does not have a negative connotation, we will not be able to convince them of anything. The ONLY reason the word has "negative connotations" is due to people not being able to think critically and logically.
...changing the word is not going to make people use reason and logic. We need to change the way people think, not try to hide a word from them that should not be considered bad in the first place.
I can see Sam's point but it's almost like Creationism re-branding themselves as Intelligent Design. I tend not to use the term Atheist unless I'm question since it does have such baggage. I prefer to explain to people that I am not religious and I will go in depth if probed.
By the way, I am a Christian (a "moderate" one [thanx for the word FakeSagan]) and I don't have an air-tight line of logic for an issue of faith. The two ways of thinking are completely incompatible.
I am a bit reluctant to call myself a "theist" for the reason I posted earlier.
Despite what you may think, I am a really big fan of yours and I agree with most of what you say. *shrugz* So I'm going to hell. ;)
We need to produce a new moral, social and ideological structure to replace religion, and it's grim, dark and dangerous 'prophecies'.
I think we will only be able to let go of all these fairytales and horrible parts of religion, and keep the good moral stuff (if any) when we replace religion with a new structure.
I've always believed pigeon holing, and labeling is the root cause to much of the violent conflict in the world today...
For me, it is just being vague... It is possible to 'mislead' people by labeling yourself with vague titles.
Religious people are too mentally weak to accept and embrace a new structure... They would descend into chaos without their childhood dreams being made a reality into adulthood.
I love listening to all those guys including Sam Harris. But I keep in mind that they come from the intelligencia. The highly educated class whose social environment is the college campus. Myself I am of the working class. The blue collar variety. His suggestion of stragedy and tactics probably work best in his environment.
The term atheism does not address the skill we posess for analyzing religion(even when under the influence of said religion.) It was this skill that made me an atheist. I wasn't supposed to doubt, but scientific analysis required it. I knew it had to be looked at critically and unemotionally. Most indoctrinated people cannot utilize this ability. You have to have it in you to overcome it, or your will remain trapped. This is what makes me "better" than the brainwashed victim. LOL
Idealogical thinking usually dismisses the following: human greed of money and power and need to validate religion....somebody will ALWAYS seek these and seeking leads to war and the reasons for war: power, money/land/resources, and religion. Other reason for war is opposing ideals, so if ANYBODY opposes this new Global peace idea...war results....maybe we shouldn't throw our weapons away. What do you think?
first of all RabidApe, i am a big fan. i share "some" if not all of your beliefs. i am a fan of all sciences and i read and study religion to become enlightened in the fact of why so many people follow a religion. i do have a critique though. I have seen the Bill Hicks video before and my first response was the same as yours. I consider myself a realist, and that video was full of idealogical ideas which come across as simple black and white when it is really far more complex.
it's not impractical, it is impossible. you are going into the realm of religious thinking...the impossible made possible. we all need hope, and most people find it with religion...you are substituting this void with idealogical impossibilities. but if this works for you, so be it. i know you are smarter than this though.
So I gather Bill Hicks would disarm America and use the billions of dollars spent on defense to educate the Islamonazis to do what? Kill infidels like me, I am an atheist, more humanely?
I'm posting this BEFORE watching the Harris video: I think I get what you're saying about the connotations that come with the label "Atheism"... but why be politically correct for theists? It's about time THEY made the effort to learn what Atheism truly is. If they're too lazy to do that now, they will ALWAYS be.
OK, watched the videos: Yeah, I guess I could let go of the label "Atheism" in order to get everybody on the same page. It's true that we waste valuable time and energy having the same arguments, and that we tend to lump everybody into one category. I really liked "advocates of intellectual honesty". Hopefully it's a label the entire world can share.
Dude, i'v been going through the same shit, but i'v been doing so for a long time now. Which is why i was so hesitant about making anti Christian and anti religion vids. And yes, Bill Hicks is my hero and role model. (he's a theist) and i think thats what i like most about him. I'll try getting my web cam back, and ill make ya a proper vid response untill then!
I think Atheist® has become something of a trademark, it´s easy recognisable. If you want to change a trademark you got to be careful.
What about the term "Evolutionary humanism"
I think it was coined by Sir Julian Huxley, grandson of T. H. Huxley aka "Darwin's Bulldog".
But I guess no matter how you coin yourself or even if you don´t call yourself anything at all, religious people opposing all ideas contradicting the bible will still call you an atheist ;)
You know, I loved that Sam Harris talk too. I think that man mankes so much sense. He made me stop defining myself as an atheist, even though I clearly am one.
I'd be very very sad, as there would no longer be a meat market, and there would likely be a wide variety of rules set up in various societies in order to enforce that protection of animals, insects, etc.
I recently did a video that deals with this subject, that for the sake of conversational expediency that perhaps a new, gentler, more generalized (as there are so many "breeds" of atheism) moniker is warranted, thus I created the tongue-in-cheek "theistic-un-belly-feeler". Ultimately, a label should be functional, and I'm thinking that this is a big to-do about nothing.
I'm not personally compelled to alter my verbage if the nooks and crannies in my wording does not inspire happy fuzzies in the listener, and we should remember that while we should endeavor to communicate in a civil fashion, my satisfaction with my own syntax is more important than your displeasure with it.
Its funny, I was thinking the same thing yesterday. I am atheist but i never ever use the word to discribe myself. the word just sounds bad to me. I just dont think there is a god and am not afrade to say it.
A couple things. As a common direction and focus, atheists and humanists can agree on the fact that we can be moral good people - without a belief in God - out a simple regard for human dignity, decency and interdependence.
What if "reasonable/rational intellectualism" (my term) replaces all belief in God. The word atheist would be transcended & have no meaning. Perhaps we can see it as a movement to transcend belief in God & transition into a global intellectualize reality.
mreous333 10 months ago
@mreous333 Atheism would be transcended then because there would be no theism. In retrospect, Harris's argument would be valid. What might be the impact of we see it as a movement away from theism and towards humanism, defending education (which Christianity threatens), intellectualism (which the Bible puts down), etc? When you understand the psychological, intellectual & communication terrorism in the Bible and Christianity, having a stance against it is easy to defend.
mreous333 10 months ago
A good way to make an Atheist shut up would be to ask tis question.."It takes time to create something right?...well during the big bang that's when time started,however how could something begin when there wasn't any time for something to start? Because before the Big Bang there wasn't any time".
m2frogger 2 years ago
1) I don't know what that would "make an atheist shut up"
2) "It takes time to create something right?" I don't know, does it? Please define "create" and provide an example.
RabidApe 2 years ago
!.Because naturally that's a hard question to answer,being that it provides minor proof for the existence of an intelligent creator.
2.You're writing something. Does it not take time to create that body of literature?So if there was no time to start with,how could the BB be and accident?
m2frogger 2 years ago
1) "it provides minor proof for the existence of an intelligent creator" Says you. You haven't connected those dots.
2) "You're writing something" I am manipulating matter and energy that has existed for approx 13.7 billion years. I don't know where this stuff was "before" then, or if that is even a meaningful concept. (You did not define "create"...)
3) "how could the BB be and accident? " I'm pretty sure I didn't say that.
What does any of this have to do with this video?
RabidApe 2 years ago
I always select the "other" option on any site that asks about religion. I believe God is real--in the hearts and minds of his believers, but I'm too well educated to believe the bible to be a true.
But I really would like to join a religion, for the social aspect. I want a place to go to where I can talk with other people about my beliefs and hear theirs, learn new things, be able to talk to people with open minds...
But even among Atheists there are few truly open minds.
SketchmanQC 2 years ago
@SketchmanQC To believe in a God, we must present valid reasons for doing so that cannot be refuted by science. The common reasons for believing in God, and there are many, are easily refutable with what we know about psychology, sociology and human/animal behavior. Critical thinking and logical consistency in all areas of life is important even to those who believe in God. If you present your reasons for a belief in God, them we can discuss whether or not they are valid and reasonable.
mreous333 10 months ago
I gotta say Sam Harris is on to something, as I've had completely different and much more productive conversations with people by not triggering their defensiveness of their religion. Which seems to happen, just by saying you're an atheist or non-believer. Also, when you don't stick yourself in a box, you start coming up with much more creative ways to dismantle bad ideas people may hold.
unclebeen 2 years ago
@unclebeen This can be a good way to circumvent their conditioned defenses. And if they call you an atheist, you can easily refute them. An "intellectual rationalist" or "rational intellectualist" would be a good term. Or you can just say you are a human who focuses on reasonable and rational intellectualism.
mreous333 10 months ago
hey id love to watch the sam harris video, but its been removed from youtube :( could you post an alternate link?
robwayleftw 2 years ago
done
RabidApe 2 years ago
thank you very much for the quick response. much appreciated as sam harris may be my favorite writer on the subject of theology besides Richard Dawkins, though God is Not Great was a classic so Hitchens may tie him.
robwayleftw 2 years ago
@robwayleftw On the subject of theology they are great writers. If we were to talk about Christianity specifically, the best book I have ever read is "A Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible" by Ruth Hurmence Greene. The Freedom From Religion foundation states that no one since Thomas Paine has debunked the Bible like Ruth Greene, and the more you delve into it, the more you realize how full of nonsense the religion is.
mreous333 10 months ago
The biggest arguement against atheism is this: If God exists, then obvioulsy He's far beyond any human ability to figure out what exactly his make up is. So, if God has decided that He can only be known in a particular fashion (He can do that because He is God), then how on earth can any atheist be proven wrong? If a human refuses to accept the manner by which God Himself has chosen to be known, then nothing can prove the existenced of God.
God must be, by nature, beyond nature & science.
johnnywinternut 3 years ago
When you banged your desk at 4:16 that made me jump. Seriously, I think my heart skipped a beat!
DeepSpaceStoner 3 years ago
This subject needed 18 minutes of waffle? It matters? Jeez.
Langnasen 3 years ago
Feeding all the starving people now will just create more misery later. While it is true we can feed everyone now they will just make more until we can't feed all the starving people. Only then you will have many more starving people. Every species has more offspring than can live. Why do you think we are different? Birth control before conception is ideal. Birth control by starvation and war sucks. There will be birth control though.
WarmWeatherGuy 3 years ago
Are you saying that "starvation" the only natural form of birth control and obviously this is a terrible thing. The only way to prevent starvation is to use artificial contraception.
10secstomeltdown 3 years ago
Personally I don't see a need to change the name. Atheist isn't an identity it's a characteristic. Atheist "Lacking the trait of believing in god/s" Bald "Lacking the trait of abundant hair follicles on the head." It's just one identifiable trait that has a name. I mean I'm an atheist. I'm also a philosophical taoist. of the two the last is more of an identifying trait. The first is a secondary characteristic of other factors in my life.
ratholin 3 years ago
Sam Harris is quite right. I am an Objectivist -- in essence an advocate of reason and freedom. I always explain my position as faith versus reason, in general. This often has interesting results, but most people won't explicitly argue against reason. In fact most people think it's a value. So this helps when you go into discussions of faith related topics.
Id like to see people come to terms with the fact that faith and reason are opposed. Some honestly believe they are not.
marneedear 3 years ago
I posted this on the Harris vid, but it will probably cycle out quickly, so...
1) Sam suggests that we abandon the label of atheist. I'll make the dissenting argument. I do not wear the label of atheist as a badge of honor. Nor do I imagine that it makes me part of a tightly unified group. Given the independent nature of most atheists, nothing could be further from the truth. I also understand how silly it is to invent a label for every single non-belief we have.
cont...
47f0 3 years ago
2) But Sam is somewhat naive in believing that we can somehow go into "stealth" mode and sneak up on people's fundamental beliefs by abandoning that label. It's a form of re-branding which fools no one. People of faith are experts at re-branding. Witness the evolution from "creationism" to "creation science" to "intelligent design" to "teach the controversy". Islam is re-branded as "the religion of peace".
cont...
47f0 3 years ago
3) No, people of faith, whatever you may think of their intellectual capacity, are going to do exactly one thing when you propose a framework of reason and evidence vs. a framework of blind belief - they will assign you the label of atheist, whether you proclaim it or not. So I think we gain no tactical advantage in one-on-one dialog. But there's another point I think Sam has missed. We are under attack.
cont...
47f0 3 years ago
4) From our school boards, to our town councils, to our courtrooms, to the very constitution, we are besieged by people who would see only one book taught in our schools, and a constitution that reads like Leviticus. Politicians have no problem dismissing a bunch of disassociated individuals. But they do pay attention to large groups.
cont...
47f0 3 years ago
5) After the Civil War, many light-skinned blacks moved north, and did everything they could to "pass for white". While that got them personal success, it did nothing to further the cause of blacks in America. No, it took large groups of black Americans, marching and protesting, to gain rights. Jews, a minority that was discriminated against in America, did not gain rights and acceptance by abandoning the label of Jew.
cont...
47f0 3 years ago
6) No closeted gay person has done a thing that promoted the notion of gay civil rights in the public eye. Consider this. Out of over 500 elected government officials in Washington, only one professes to be an atheist.
No Sam, the problem isn't that we are labeled as atheist - the problem is that we aren't nearly vocal and visible enough as atheists.
47f0 3 years ago
1st time I got called atheist I rejected the name & still do, my thought was that atheists might believe other things that I don't. Something that bugs me is the idea that faith & religion are the same thing. I think that faith has been used a manipulative tool by religions & could/should be kept seperate from religions.
celticarchie 3 years ago
I watched the sam harris argument and its really good, But their is a problem with it and its this. taking his racist example, would it be more likey to here (at the Time rember) someone say "I'm a racist" or "I'm Not a racist" as a defining charateristic, Something sets you apart from others. Thats what the minority has had to do, Think of racisim, Gay people, Womens rights. In order for these people to be heard and to get their arguments and points cross to the other side
canti1988 3 years ago
They have had to come under a certin banner or name and fight for that cause. As the minority we should seak saflty in numbers and group together because then our voices would be heard by more people and it would have a greater effect. So if we are going to achieve our goals(generaly i think we would all like to see maybe not the removal of relgion but certinly some of its acpests of our society, But no one man is the voice of the people) We need to fight together
canti1988 3 years ago
If we adopt an anti intellectual or anti erational and stance we are still fighting the same battle. but if you asked say are creationist Do you think your rational in your resoning, Of course they will say yes, yet we know that they aren't. so tactic change is farily useless as thats pretty much is happening know. Also i think we run the risk of dispanding the athesit movement if we dont keep ourselfs as athesits and we might loose support. Instead i think we have to change the perception of us
canti1988 3 years ago
The yotube community is fairly set in stone i feel. You wont have people like Jesusfreak or The Amazing atheist change sides of the fence. Instead we should focus on the Public. As from what i can tell, the other portrail of atheists on the news and common media is the funny little guy how is on a little rant about the words "under god" on and in certin places. The Genral public has no idea of the arguments and discusions and debates and ideas that athesits are capable of.
canti1988 3 years ago
True, but you would form a group of people against racists. A people with that uniting cause.
Simply being "not racist" isnt a defining feature.
I am an atheist and antireligous.
marcotenshi 3 years ago
The problem is...the reason why these Delusional people don't see the absurdity of their own religion(bible) is because they aren't educated about it! Most of which haven't even read the bible cover to cover or even close. They don't even know that there is a TALKING DONKEY OR TALKING MONKEY...OR BONES OF OTHER HUMAN SPECIES! THEY BELIEVE THE PROPAGANDA THEY HEAR IN CHURCH! THEY HAVE BEEN FORCE-FED THIS GARBAGE SINCE BIRTH..THEY DON'T KNOW NO DIFFERENT!! I SAW THE SAME HARRIS VIDEO..GREAT!!
whole27 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice video! my names Mia, kinda feelin bored if any1 wants to join me on cam or wana chat i will be signed on at __ FriendlyFlirts(.COM) __ my user ID there is Mia_qfalz chat soon xx its FR33 to j0in! mwah
Lorenzia80 3 years ago
Concerning the Bill Hicks video: Richard Bach wrote a great little book in the 70's, "Illusions" which you might enjoy (or think absolutely trite). It is smarmy like much of the 70's, but the character Don Shimoda talks about human experience using a metaphor about the movies we go to.
peekayb 3 years ago
Rabidape,
Of the secular leadership I probably gravitate toward Sam Harris more than the others. I've actually been touting dropping the label for a couple decades not. I don't see the logic in defining myself in the negative. I mean, there is no other context where we do this. All it does is validate and arm the fundamentalists. Also, it draws a fallacious line between us and all the various fundamentalist sects that are/were coincidentally atheists. The reasons go on and on.
brickbungalow 3 years ago
I would just like to reassure the readers and watchers that I know many christians who are tolerant and reasonable. Folks I can converse with rationally even if we don't agree. They don't need to threaten and insult anyone they don't understand. Please don't think ufchomp speaks for all of them.
brickbungalow 3 years ago
"you people" meaning atheists, although you are trying to quit saying that word because you now understand what it means are a group of extremist that follow leaders or whatever you call them of an unorthodox sect. Some people just want to be different and rebel against society and some people, sadly enough, rebel against GOd in order to bring attention to themselves. Why the gatherings and the speeches..if you don't believe fine, but nooo, you got to have some attention right?again CULT
ufchomp 3 years ago
Relaaaaaaaaaaaaax, guy! Take a deep breath, and count to ten.
You seem to be throwing around a lot of emotionally charged words, but not thinking about them too much.
*Please tell me an example of my 'extremism'.
*I wasn't aware that I was a part of a 'sect'... What's it called? Where's the headquarters? Who do I make my check out to?
*As for "rebelling against god" - I can't rebel against something non-existent.
RabidApe 3 years ago
"Why the gatherings and the speeches.."?
Is THAT how you define what a 'cult' is?
So I guess physicists, software engineers, sports fans, video game players, political activists, dog breeders, and boating enthusiasts are all in a cult, too, eh?
If you're going to stretch a word to the point where it can mean anything, then you are communicating nothing - and your words are meaningless.
What's the difference between a 'cult' and a 'religion'?
RabidApe 3 years ago
we don't gather, don't worship, don't make meetings to complain about God. We are individuals who have something in common, we don't believe in religion. I wouldn't care about it if it doesn't affect me, but it does, in science, in politics, in laws etcetera that's why I care. there is no such thing as a lider; every one that thinks his attitude towards religion is not to believe it (atheism) is different, ther's no such thing as an Atheist cult. A cult based about not believing in something? XD
Athrek 3 years ago
Why do theists just brush of Atheism as just young people rebelling against God? I hear that so much. Do you really believe we're all rebelling just for the sake of rebelling against something? Well, I'm not, and I have a feeling I'm not alone in this. When I was about 12, I stopped believing and discovered science at the same time. For a few years I looked not only at Catholicism, but at many religions. None of them offered any evidence when Science offers quite a bit.
GayForDarwin 3 years ago
Just wondering. Did you reject the religious beliefs you formally had and then discover science or did your discovery of science influence you to reject those beliefs?
xlilxandyx 3 years ago
So, after questioning my beliefs and looking at the mountain of evidence science has to offer, accept the scientific explanations for our universe and why everything is what it is. It isn't because I need to rebel against something, it's because the evidence points to that.
GayForDarwin 3 years ago
you people are a cult...nothing more....nothing less....
ufchomp 3 years ago
huh?
What do you mean by "you people"?
What is your definition of "cult"?
RabidApe 3 years ago
I also have been watching all of Sam Harris and have learned so much and like you have revised my own theories and 'beliefs'.I am deffinitelly an atheist, more to the point an anti-theist,but my standing point is this:I hold nothing against theism IF it stays indoors,in churches,in personal privacy,but when it interferes with peoples' safety, science or social progress,sex lives,all that,it needs to be updated,not eradicated, but renewed or altered nonetheless (to fit in society's changes).
Domzdream 3 years ago
The only thing I disagree with is the bit about all humanity coming together...I can't conceive of such a thing happening in any short breadth of time from our present with the world being so full of violent magical thinking.
cypherphage 3 years ago
Thanks for the videos. Sam's ideas were rather eye opening.
A4AgnstcFndmntlst 3 years ago 2
haha, yeah, I soon noticed as I started to comment vids that I was immidieatly stereotyped.
-"Yu'r a atheist, a tree-huggin marxist vegan healthnut guy bound for hell!"
I go like: -"WTF? what has my political views, my diet and.. tree-huggin got to DO with it??"
-"ooh! I know your kind..."
uuh yeah uumm... *backs away slowly, waving the cuu-coo-guy goodbye*
Paxmax 4 years ago
This was a great video. Looking forward to the Sam Harris video.
squitmaa 4 years ago
As far as I can see it, and I think I can speak with a certain degree of neutrality because I was a active catholic, and now I prefer to keep an open view on the world, and accept what science can teach us. I do not firmly believe that there is no God, I accept that for now there can't be a conclusion.
And as I see it, atheist IS a wrong word. I think what you are RabidApe, and most of the people that call themselfs atheists, are trully Humanists. They believe in the power of mankind.
kriptonis 4 years ago
SO, i would like to know your opinion on that, I know I don't make a real argument, it's just a couple of words in a comment, but I'm thinking of making my first video regarding this. So if you think it's worth the trouble, say what you think of my comment.
kriptonis 4 years ago
"We have it in our power to begin the world over again."-Thomas Paine
watch?v=AvTEZqPhT7Y
overmind25 4 years ago
I can't remember exactly where I heard it but I heard about a campaign to rename atheists as 'brights' - the same way homosexuals had a campaign to rename themselves as gays. Made me smile ^^
Personally, I think labels as a whole are bad, because it assumes that you're kindof.. different from the norm. The same way you wouldn't really go around calling yourself a straight, or a white. Idk. I have positive connotations of the name atheist so.. ah. It'd be wonderful if everyone could think that.
Sarahykinz 4 years ago
Rabid, I agree with both Sam and yourself on dropping the 'Atheist' term. It makes sense. However when debating religious people on any specific issue there a problem when they invoke the celestial dictator to substantiate their position. One has to learn how to tackle that kind of argument without going down the 'god is a fantasy' route thus avoiding being labelled 'atheist'. Good luck with that. I'm learning it too.
artyfarty2 4 years ago
omg... Atheism, the new religion... thanks Sam Harris..
mchaosx 4 years ago
The problem (especially with a lot of Christians) is that they do not want to do any research; they want their pastor (minister, whoever) to tell them what to think. They want the term atheism to explain all there is about the person and it hurts their minds to try and find out about a non-believer.
peepnklown 4 years ago
I disagree with that statement. In my experience christians will do research, but they look only for things that support their beliefs. This sadly sends many of them running into the open arms and plastic smiles of the young earthers and anti evolutionists. Atheists in my experience are way too brutal when talking to christians. I'm guilty of it too. It may not be possible to get a dogged theist to jump ship very often but carefully chosen words can get one to take a step in the right direction.
artyfarty2 4 years ago
It doesn't matter the label; when you do not believe in God you are carrying negative conations (baggage) when dealing with theists (especially Christians); so dropping the label will not take away the negative conations.
peepnklown 4 years ago
Not necessarily with theists. Just with religious theists, and no that is not a redundant choice of words. Deists believe in a deity of some kind but attach no value to the act or worship or supplication. This makes them secular theists and with them one does not have this problem.
lazyperfectionist1 4 years ago
The point was made decades before Harris was born. Humanists are looking at these conversations and wondering why everyone's acting like these are some new revelations. I guess they are new to many individuals - myself included at one time, and that's great. See americanhumanist dot org and find a local group in your area :)
dtstrain 4 years ago
Harris is an eminent thinker on this subject. He perhaps has thought longer and harder than Dawkins, Hitchens and Dennett. I'm an ex believer of 5-6 years and the world 'atheist' STILL sounds like 'nazi' or 'fascist' to me. Still has an almost malevolent connotation or something devoid of positivity and warmth. So in that respect I agree it's a good idea to ditch the term. Also he's right that we should not form an entity from an essentially non-existent position. Like non-astrologist.
pos777 4 years ago
Poor RabidApe ! "Killing no insects". You seem to walk into an Eastern way of thinking ? As long, you will allow me to kill insects and eat beef, pork, life oysters and so on. You question human moral ? Due to gene misfunction, not all people can feel love. Maybe, you have a gene that makes you have 'to reason'. Maybe 600.000.000 people not, so they try and find a God. Not everyone will agree with your vision of 'a better world'.
TheProfessors 4 years ago
May post was much longer, but YouTube will not allow. "You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time." - Bob Marley.
I am proud to be 'free from God', 'Theoless', 'No Theo', 'A-Theo', Atheist. Why make a fuzz over a word ?
TheProfessors 4 years ago
That's like how some would avoiding using the term "anarchist" because of its very negative connotations in the public's mind.
It could be a stretegy for you but, to be really picky, you can't deny that you are dumbing things down to gain wider acceptance. To be fair, however, its not like many of us are not guilty of that anyway.
I consider myself agnostic. Maybe you want to consider if "agnostic" describe you better.
nibelungensohn 4 years ago
What is your view on the Bahai Faith?
jrandall1968 4 years ago
i watched that video a few months ago and i had the same reaction. my feeling is that you can call yourself whatever you like, you'll still always be an atheist in the mind of a theist. i just don't think you should make a big deal out of it because it's just one aspect of who you are and doesn't define you as a person.
TextAndViolence 4 years ago
Damn dude, just watched your vid and ended up on a three hour tour around everything from Bill Hicks to Alan Watts. Kick ass!! If asked "do you believe in a spiritual world?", I would reply "No, b/c there is no evidence" rather than "No, I'm an Atheist". Don't get too wrapped up in labels. If some dude named Crapper made the automobile instead of a toilet, we'd be driving Crappers around instead of Fords.
Astrosteed 4 years ago
THAT STUFF ON THE WALL TO SOUND PROOF?
MATTx602 4 years ago
IT ABSORBS ECHO.
colleen3217 4 years ago
ESPECIALLY USEFUL IF YOU'RE SHOUTING
bitbutter 4 years ago
YEAH.
teehee...
colleen3217 4 years ago
I see two issues here: 1) When you leave a religious community its nice to identify with others more based in logic then the fantastic magic of religious dogma, having a name for those people helps. 2) It seems inevitable that any theist would ask "so you are a atheist?" and at that point its a purely a semantical debate. You can say "I am promoting reason", but they will interpret that to mean you are being less then honest, and they may have a point.
erkd1 4 years ago
Debating of 2 Atheists?
Guy1: I dont belive in God(s) and you?
Guy2: hmm I dont belive either
Guy1: cool
Guy2: yep
Guy3: Hey you guys what are you tlaking about?
Guy2: We are Atheits
Guy3: Ah, Ok me too
All Guy's: Well, bye
-.-
MrMudd1988 4 years ago
I'm very open to transrational spiritual models (ex. commersialized budhism), and if I find one I agree with, I'll gladly embrace it and this approach shouldn't be attacked by atheists, because it is not their business. As an atheist for now, I shouldn't be looked down on by religious either, it is not bad to be different.
Trying to spread fundamentalism is always a bad idea I think. Great video.
Censeo 4 years ago
I have to go to work in 10 minutes, but I can't stop watching this video! ahhh!
Ujikaweapon1 4 years ago
I actually came back and watched this video again, due to how important to you it seemed to be at the end. I agree with you about how we could be spending our money, short of the whole "feeding the hungry" bit. Before you go advocating straight-up charity I would suggest you do a bit of research on the subject. If you go watch some of the TED TALKS videos from recent years having to do with business in the developing world I think it would be really, really enlightening for you about that.
abortedsoul 4 years ago
Indeed!
I have a lot of homework to do!
I want to teach people to fish - I don't want to feed them . And we can probably do a lot to fix 'our house' before focusing too much on EVERYONE else.
And the TEDtalks are essential viewing for all homo sapiens, as far as I'm concerned.
RabidApe 4 years ago
new sub. coool stuff. let's talk saving dumb people from themselves ;)
VirtualWiiality 4 years ago
"...so yeah." I love those moments where you know you're not going to edit the video, but you know you're fucked because you forgot what you were going to say. Good times.
abortedsoul 4 years ago
it's a skill!
;D
nice to see you around, brah!
RabidApe 4 years ago
It is hard if not impossable to have a label that doesn't come with baggage. But I think it is ultimately up to us not to lie down in the chalk out line that others have drawn for us. The same can be said for the theists, christian,muslem, ect, all these lables have baggage.
traog 4 years ago
Then he continues to what I see as pwning atheism. He's one insightful mother f**ker but I think he is a "closet theist" LOL
I can totally see your hope in this manner but what are your thoughts on all this Rabid? If you want, you can pm me. : )
nodrahma 4 years ago
Then he goes on to mention not borrowing contemplative tools... perhaps building a 'mental telescope', 'non-astrology'???
"Atheism is synonymous with not being interested in what buddah or Jesus "experienced""... duh... I don't imagine you would go on to call yourselves atheists. : )
nodrahma 4 years ago
then he continues to describe it like a crazy person walking down the street talking to himself out loud but internalized. (It is crazy, I remember)
"When a person breaks this spell... an extraordinary type of relief is available."
I'm not trying to devalue contemplativeness, but this is what being reborn is like - on a permanent basis. No meditation required.
nodrahma 4 years ago
~31:00 Sam proposes "an alternative to living at the mercy of the next neurotic thought that comes careening into consciousness; alternative to living consciously spellbound by listening to the conversation we are having with ourselves.
"habitual failure to recognize thought as thought; our habitual identification with discursive thought is the PRIMARY SOURCE OF HUMAN SUFFERING"
These words are golden!
nodrahma 4 years ago
Being reborn and having a "personal relationship" with Jesus has completely eliminated the very nature of this internalized suffering in my life. The unbound love I feel in my heart from what He did for us gives a whole new meaning to life. Try to internalize an eternal heaven and what that would be like.
nodrahma 4 years ago
I will say however that this chap is my new atheistic "hero". He and I share almost identical views of "perverted labeling" however he reinforces my faith by capturing the very essence of "humanistic suffering"
nodrahma 4 years ago
To edify a secular construct of ideals towards an advanced science bound utopia is "noble?" but imagine a world run by "property dualists". Is it okay for me to presume you do support the advancement of neuroscience? If yes, have you ever thought those science-fiction novels may have warped your brain?
nodrahma 4 years ago
Hey Rabid, I watched the Sam Harris video + Q&A. The very deep and "controversial" ideas conveyed to the "atheist" brethren on introspection and meditation seems similar to achieving a "nirvanic" state.(eudaimonia?)
I was very "impressed" by Sam's fluidity and ability to capture his ideas, however, the foundation of his "proposal" is not ideal by an "intellectual's" very nature. What are your thoughts?
nodrahma 4 years ago
I know ive heard christians try and call aetheisim a religion. I know this bit.
But is that still all that much of an issue anymore? I dont see this issue come around often ; especially lately. Maybe my experience is the exception
OsyenVyeter 4 years ago
it would be really cool if you would make a podcast. since you talk pretty well, and you don't use that much visual aid, I think it would work. think about it.
endr117 4 years ago
YOU DID EDIT! You added text!
Let's just fight irrationality. All bad ideas are irrational. Even Jainism.
rowsdowersavesus 4 years ago
NEGRA MODELO!!!!
Dude...best beer ever.
I have a new found respect foe you.......;)
Good vid.
djosephallen 4 years ago
i may agree with harris on the not believing... but his support for the war on that TACTIC, "terror"? fucking stupid.
it's enough to make me want to spit in his fucking face.
CheeezMaster 4 years ago
Hey, I didn't know that Adam Sandler was a leading Atheist LOL
vertigate 4 years ago
religious violence is a weak reason for being somehow opposed to religion in general. weird religious (or pseudo-scientific) belief systems are a waste of mental energy.
gonjamon99 4 years ago
a weak reason ? ever heard of islam??
matereymate 4 years ago
did you read what I wrote? did you miss the "in general" part?
gonjamon99 4 years ago
oh yeah i did,
but still you have to admitt that islam is a threat to the world even if it is not the 'general' if you know what i mean....and of course there is the thing that the main religions are almost as threatening as islam.
matereymate 4 years ago
oh yeah and I think it's a great strategy to waste time talking about labels, like I am doing right now responding to this video...damn it.
gonjamon99 4 years ago
FAIL!
;)
RabidApe 4 years ago
yeah we should refrain from using language. it carries a lot of meaning with it. (???)
gonjamon99 4 years ago 2
you stole my haircut!
kalin666 4 years ago
HAHAHAHHA. That was what i wanted to tell him right now. that he looks like you. ahaha, this must hurt for both of you.
preput 4 years ago
my beard is more glorious
kalin666 4 years ago
If you don't believe in a god you are defined as an atheist.
If you don't like that then to bad. If you don't wish to have the label of atheist then you have two options: 1) Start believing in god. or 2) Change the English language.
Maybe this doesn't help our cause but I'm sorry, thats too bad
THEoldy 4 years ago
Well, in mixed company when I don't want to offend anyone, sometimes I just say "I believe in monkeys" Asin, "funny thing, I believe in Monkeys, but HE'S the sinner" (in reference to my brother, who's a semi-fanatic, a drug adict, a criminal and a convicted fellon. In many ways we're like Superman and Bizarro. I'm Superman.)
dechha1981 4 years ago
By the sound of it, if the only religion in the world was a Jaine, I'd still be an Atheist (it still sounds INTELECTUALLY stupid) but I don't think I'd be anti-reigious. In fact, I'd be doing something else entirely right now.
dechha1981 4 years ago
If everyone were a rigorous Jain instead of other religions, the environment would be treated better. And we'd have a global living wage, and no war. I could put up with that kind of religion i do suppose. I wouldn't approve of the supernatural aspects, but above all i look at the higher good. We can deconstruct belief in supernatural without discarding their admirable values. As non-theists we know good character does not require religion.
SardonicusRexx 4 years ago
Dropping the term "atheist" is an old idea AFAIK. Been talking about it for over 20 years. Sometimes bending is more expedient. RJR changed their name to Altria. Ow, bad example since tobacco is bad.
No religion in general? I'd say they're generally into the supernatural. And Jaines are pretty damn cool, as far as religious folk go. I might rather hang with Jaines than speciesist non-thesists. Mind your human centrality and anthropocentrism there. :-)
SardonicusRexx 4 years ago
I think educating people as to what Atheism means and doesn't mean is much better than not using or changing the word to something else. If we can't show people that the word does not have a negative connotation, we will not be able to convince them of anything. The ONLY reason the word has "negative connotations" is due to people not being able to think critically and logically.
trick0171 4 years ago 2
...changing the word is not going to make people use reason and logic. We need to change the way people think, not try to hide a word from them that should not be considered bad in the first place.
trick0171 4 years ago
Exactly my thoughts.
kradraef13 4 years ago
Negra Modelo, mmmmm, good beer!
BGenerous 4 years ago
I can see Sam's point but it's almost like Creationism re-branding themselves as Intelligent Design. I tend not to use the term Atheist unless I'm question since it does have such baggage. I prefer to explain to people that I am not religious and I will go in depth if probed.
danieltheli0n 4 years ago
does that work? cause around where i live "not religious" means you believe but your not really in to it.
WtfJuju 4 years ago
By the way, I am a Christian (a "moderate" one [thanx for the word FakeSagan]) and I don't have an air-tight line of logic for an issue of faith. The two ways of thinking are completely incompatible.
I am a bit reluctant to call myself a "theist" for the reason I posted earlier.
Despite what you may think, I am a really big fan of yours and I agree with most of what you say. *shrugz* So I'm going to hell. ;)
That80sGuy1972 4 years ago
If you believe in God, then it would seem He gave you your brain so you could use it, so you're doing the right thing! ;)
Blacksun1942 4 years ago
Great vid. I admit that I snicker a bit when someone calls themselves "atheist" and trunct the word to "theist" meaning any non-atheist.
Atheist is a Christian word meaning "without God." I snicker when an atheist calls believers "theists" because that is calling them gods.
Pagan is a Christian word for non-Christian, I could go on. Many words thrown around regarding religeon has a Christian base.
That80sGuy1972 4 years ago
I wonder if the Jains' non-violence (ahimsa) principle would cause them to object to abortion.
Quizzic 4 years ago
It does.
SardonicusRexx 4 years ago
Saying one is a rational person and being an atheist have nothing to do with each other.
Sam is off the res.
rkzenrage 4 years ago
"Intellectual honesty is just the right to be honest." Robert G. Ingersoll.
Mjhavok 4 years ago
A-non
Theist- believer in god(s)
That is all it is, nothing more, an accurate description. Making more out of it is a game and I will not support that.
I will not endorse the disgusting trend of trying to redefine words we don't like what others have done with.
I don't give a shit what others say.
It is an accurate description of anyone who does not believe in a god, Buddhists, agnostics, Wiccans, and many others... deal.
rkzenrage 4 years ago
We need to produce a new moral, social and ideological structure to replace religion, and it's grim, dark and dangerous 'prophecies'.
I think we will only be able to let go of all these fairytales and horrible parts of religion, and keep the good moral stuff (if any) when we replace religion with a new structure.
only1duk 4 years ago
I've always believed pigeon holing, and labeling is the root cause to much of the violent conflict in the world today...
For me, it is just being vague... It is possible to 'mislead' people by labeling yourself with vague titles.
Religious people are too mentally weak to accept and embrace a new structure... They would descend into chaos without their childhood dreams being made a reality into adulthood.
only1duk 4 years ago
I love listening to all those guys including Sam Harris. But I keep in mind that they come from the intelligencia. The highly educated class whose social environment is the college campus. Myself I am of the working class. The blue collar variety. His suggestion of stragedy and tactics probably work best in his environment.
KasparHauser4 4 years ago
nice dome
macman13 4 years ago
bald
Duck1987 4 years ago
like britney
only1duk 4 years ago
lolz
I think baldness makes RabidApe look like a 40 year old college professor
Duck1987 4 years ago
I would suggest you check Sam's latest paper
Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief and Uncertainty
Very interesting read
Ender1zero1 4 years ago
The term atheism does not address the skill we posess for analyzing religion(even when under the influence of said religion.) It was this skill that made me an atheist. I wasn't supposed to doubt, but scientific analysis required it. I knew it had to be looked at critically and unemotionally. Most indoctrinated people cannot utilize this ability. You have to have it in you to overcome it, or your will remain trapped. This is what makes me "better" than the brainwashed victim. LOL
Brainmold 4 years ago
imo it is more enjoyable having a good debate about whether or not marijuana (or other substances) should be legal.. then about religion..
Because the war on drugs, effects us right here right now..
thefakeyeti 4 years ago
So glad to see you back, ape. Been waiting impatiently to see some more videos from you!
Revocane 4 years ago
I describe myself as a skeptic, being an atheist doesn't really describe me. How can not having a belief describe someone?
deBeuk 4 years ago
"I describe myself as a skeptic, being an atheist doesn't really describe me. How can not having a belief describe someone?"
I mean, being an atheist doesn't define me. Not having a belief cannot define someone.
deBeuk 4 years ago
continued...
Idealogical thinking usually dismisses the following: human greed of money and power and need to validate religion....somebody will ALWAYS seek these and seeking leads to war and the reasons for war: power, money/land/resources, and religion. Other reason for war is opposing ideals, so if ANYBODY opposes this new Global peace idea...war results....maybe we shouldn't throw our weapons away. What do you think?
ygolohcysPesreveR 4 years ago
I think its about time atheists should take away GOD from their atheism.
janinemelissa22 4 years ago
*take away..
janinemelissa22 4 years ago
first of all RabidApe, i am a big fan. i share "some" if not all of your beliefs. i am a fan of all sciences and i read and study religion to become enlightened in the fact of why so many people follow a religion. i do have a critique though. I have seen the Bill Hicks video before and my first response was the same as yours. I consider myself a realist, and that video was full of idealogical ideas which come across as simple black and white when it is really far more complex.
ygolohcysPesreveR 4 years ago
I don't doubt that it's a tall order, and probably impossible/impractical to actually accomplish 'overnight'.
I hope that at the very least it can serve as an 'ideal model', something we can strive for.
Enormously difficult and complicated, yes.
Prohibited by the laws of physics, no.
RabidApe 4 years ago
it's not impractical, it is impossible. you are going into the realm of religious thinking...the impossible made possible. we all need hope, and most people find it with religion...you are substituting this void with idealogical impossibilities. but if this works for you, so be it. i know you are smarter than this though.
ygolohcysPesreveR 4 years ago
So I gather Bill Hicks would disarm America and use the billions of dollars spent on defense to educate the Islamonazis to do what? Kill infidels like me, I am an atheist, more humanely?
Signofthedollar 4 years ago
Sam Harris always comes up with the best one-liners.
"Atheism is a word that shouldn't even exist, we don't have a word for non-astrologers."
"It's possible to be so well educated that you can build a nuclear bomb, and still believe you're going to get the 72 virgins".
"If you believe saying the right Latin words over a cracker, turns it into the body of Napoleon, you HAVE lost your mind."
DickJohnson3434 4 years ago
dang it, you got me 5 seconds before you said, "gretings"... now I have to give you a listen...54 stars!!!
janinemelissa22 4 years ago
I'm posting this BEFORE watching the Harris video: I think I get what you're saying about the connotations that come with the label "Atheism"... but why be politically correct for theists? It's about time THEY made the effort to learn what Atheism truly is. If they're too lazy to do that now, they will ALWAYS be.
I'll be back after I watch the video(s).
BudhagRizzo 4 years ago
...and you had me tearing up at the end of your video, dude. FUCK YOU! :)
BudhagRizzo 4 years ago
OK, watched the videos: Yeah, I guess I could let go of the label "Atheism" in order to get everybody on the same page. It's true that we waste valuable time and energy having the same arguments, and that we tend to lump everybody into one category. I really liked "advocates of intellectual honesty". Hopefully it's a label the entire world can share.
BudhagRizzo 4 years ago
Thanks so much for the mention. This is a great video.
MeIoco 4 years ago
You have now inspired 2 of my videos Rabidape, you are awesome. Prepare for a video response on Monday.
You also inspired my creationists are liars video with your link to the Quote Mining Project.
setzertrancer 4 years ago
God smot RA and made him bald haha you have no hair.4/5
Excelion333 4 years ago
Dude, i'v been going through the same shit, but i'v been doing so for a long time now. Which is why i was so hesitant about making anti Christian and anti religion vids. And yes, Bill Hicks is my hero and role model. (he's a theist) and i think thats what i like most about him. I'll try getting my web cam back, and ill make ya a proper vid response untill then!
--JujU
WtfJuju 4 years ago
Bald... shiny!
CheezMonsterCrazy 4 years ago
Oh my god! a hairless ape? =o
C17Citadel 4 years ago
JESUS! DEREK VINEYARD IN THE HOUSE!
NothingIsFact 4 years ago
I think Atheist® has become something of a trademark, it´s easy recognisable. If you want to change a trademark you got to be careful.
What about the term "Evolutionary humanism"
I think it was coined by Sir Julian Huxley, grandson of T. H. Huxley aka "Darwin's Bulldog".
But I guess no matter how you coin yourself or even if you don´t call yourself anything at all, religious people opposing all ideas contradicting the bible will still call you an atheist ;)
DeletedDelusion 4 years ago
You know, I loved that Sam Harris talk too. I think that man mankes so much sense. He made me stop defining myself as an atheist, even though I clearly am one.
DeusMortemEst 4 years ago
If every Christian Muslim or Jew was Jain...
I'd be very very sad, as there would no longer be a meat market, and there would likely be a wide variety of rules set up in various societies in order to enforce that protection of animals, insects, etc.
Theycallmetomu 4 years ago
Great vid--5 stars!!!
creepsomber 4 years ago
Personally, I like to call myself Ignostic.
Theycallmetomu 4 years ago
I recently did a video that deals with this subject, that for the sake of conversational expediency that perhaps a new, gentler, more generalized (as there are so many "breeds" of atheism) moniker is warranted, thus I created the tongue-in-cheek "theistic-un-belly-feeler". Ultimately, a label should be functional, and I'm thinking that this is a big to-do about nothing.
creepsomber 4 years ago
I'm not personally compelled to alter my verbage if the nooks and crannies in my wording does not inspire happy fuzzies in the listener, and we should remember that while we should endeavor to communicate in a civil fashion, my satisfaction with my own syntax is more important than your displeasure with it.
creepsomber 4 years ago
Its funny, I was thinking the same thing yesterday. I am atheist but i never ever use the word to discribe myself. the word just sounds bad to me. I just dont think there is a god and am not afrade to say it.