Don't bother Sam. You could describe those who don't accept religious claims at face value as "thinkers" or "realists" or any word you like. The religious will throw enough contempt on it to make it sound bad. Just don't bother trying to redefine it, simple accept you are, in the technical definition, an atheist. If people recoil at the word, that's their problem.
I think this is a necessary post. It's not a semantics game that Harris is playing...it's a clarification on a clouded term.
The "non-astrologer" , "non-alchemist" line of reasoning is valid. This shouldn't be a hard thing to understand, but unfortunately it is for most.
njstalker8 6 months ago
Don't bother Sam. You could describe those who don't accept religious claims at face value as "thinkers" or "realists" or any word you like. The religious will throw enough contempt on it to make it sound bad. Just don't bother trying to redefine it, simple accept you are, in the technical definition, an atheist. If people recoil at the word, that's their problem.
AkrayBothorda 10 months ago
love sam harris, but here i have to disagree with him. we all use labels of some kind ,i.e. lawyer, mason doctor, man ,woman etc.
MrAngryinch 1 year ago