I’ve been invited to be on a religious diversity panel for a large class (200+ people) at Purdue. I’m representing non-theists, and I’ll have a maximum of 7 minutes to explain atheism & agnosticism to a room full of agriculture students. This will probably be the first time many of them have heard about atheism (at least, other than stereotypes), so I don’t want to screw up this opportunity.
If you had 7 minutes to explain atheism to someone, what would you include?
EDIT: These were the general guide lines I was given about the presentation:
– Who or what is God for you? (or what are your main objections about God)
– A summary of what you believe: Your faith
– What is your faith based on?
Yep, I get 7 minutes to explain a philosophy that took my whole life to understand. Awesome!
http://dontclickthis.whatingods.name/occamsrazor.jpg
'Nuff Said
http://dontclickthis.whatingod…‘Nuff Said
Also, the image is safe, though the url is a little misleading.
Also, the image is safe, though the url is a little misleading.
Well, keeping in mind I'm a Christian and thus you may suspect my intentions here (ie., maybe I'm trying to trip you up), I'd say start out with that "We just believe in one god less than you guys" line and from there move on to how natural selection explains the diversity of life and whatnot.
I'd also recommend including a few words on how atheists don't see higher meaning or purpose in anything, including human consciousness and existence and that whatever religions aspire to in regards to spiritual development or the salvation of the soul don't apply because atheists don't believe in a soul or life after death. That's one of the major differences between atheism and any religion (beyond the question of deities) and so I'd strongly recommend touching upon it.
Well, keeping in mind I’m a Christian and thus you may suspect my intentions here (ie., maybe I’m trying to trip you up), I’d say start out with that “We just believe in one god less than you guys” line and from there move on to how natural selection explains the diversity of life and whatnot.I’d also recommend including a few words on how atheists don’t see higher meaning or purpose in anything, including human consciousness and existence and that whatever religions aspire to in regards to spiritual development or the salvation of the soul don’t apply because atheists don’t believe in a soul or life after death. That’s one of the major differences between atheism and any religion (beyond the question of deities) and so I’d strongly recommend touching upon it.
1. definition of atheism, explanation that all atheists don't necessarily share the exact same beliefs,etc… just an intro into what atheism means on a very literal level.
2. The standard debunking: we aren't satanists, we don't kick puppies and eat babies, we are normal people, not crazy radicals…etc.
3. We have morals. That typically falls under #2, but I think more explanation is needed on this one. For people who have always been taught that morality comes from god, I really think you need to devote a minute or two to explaining how morals can arise out of logic, desire to live in a pleasant & peaceful society, etc. You don't have enough time for much evolution-of-morality, so don't go into it, except maybe to mention that other social animals have morals of sorts.
1. definition of atheism, explanation that all atheists don’t necessarily share the exact same beliefs,etc… just an intro into what atheism means on a very literal level.2. The standard debunking: we aren’t satanists, we don’t kick puppies and eat babies, we are normal people, not crazy radicals…etc.3. We have morals. That typically falls under #2, but I think more explanation is needed on this one. For people who have always been taught that morality comes from god, I really think you need to devote a minute or two to explaining how morals can arise out of logic, desire to live in a pleasant & peaceful society, etc. You don’t have enough time for much evolution-of-morality, so don’t go into it, except maybe to mention that other social animals have morals of sorts.
I liked AC Grayling's opening statements on this iq^2 debate.
I hope you find it useful.
I liked AC Grayling’s opening statements on this iq^2 debate.
I hope you find it useful.
As atheists, we disbelieve the existence of beings known as 'gods' or 'deities', and all things that imply their existence, such as efficacy of prayer, or creationism. We have no dogma or doctrine. We generally attempt to think rationally, believe in that which is real, and disbelieve that which is imaginary. We generally attempt to live moral lives, although our morals are generally based on kindness, manners, and not doing harm, as best we understand these concepts, not on the demands of any book (ancient or otherwise), and we follow these morals simply because we like people and therefore want to be kind to them, as we do not believe in any threat of supernatural punishment. We believe death is an end with nothing after it for us as thinking beings, and we therefore cherish this one life we have and wish to spend it productively focusing on reality rather than on any activities we are expected to participate in after our death, because we believe those to be imaginary. We do not believe in any supernatural significance of holidays, although we may celebrate them anyway for social, cultural, or family reasons.
As atheists, we disbelieve the existence of beings known as ‘gods’ or ‘deities’, and all things that imply their existence, such as efficacy of prayer, or creationism. We have no dogma or doctrine. We generally attempt to think rationally, believe in that which is real, and disbelieve that which is imaginary. We generally attempt to live moral lives, although our morals are generally based on kindness, manners, and not doing harm, as best we understand these concepts, not on the demands of any book (ancient or otherwise), and we follow these morals simply because we like people and therefore want to be kind to them, as we do not believe in any threat of supernatural punishment. We believe death is an end with nothing after it for us as thinking beings, and we therefore cherish this one life we have and wish to spend it productively focusing on reality rather than on any activities we are expected to participate in after our death, because we believe those to be imaginary. We do not believe in any supernatural significance of holidays, although we may celebrate them anyway for social, cultural, or family reasons.
Well definitions first, you might or might not agree
1. Atheism/agnosticism are not collected sets of beliefs or a philosophy of life but one aspect of such a set or philosophy. It may even be a non-essential aspect (e.g., atheistic Quakers, Buddhists, or Unitarian Universalists usually sit quite comfortably with their theistic kin). Many but by no means all non-religious atheists consider themselves humanists (lowercase h).
2. A very brief description on why atheists don't accept a belief in a god.
Emphasize what you are not what you are not.
3. You could expand on humanism (if you consider yourself one)
Well definitions first, you might or might not agree1. Atheism/agnosticism are not collected sets of beliefs or a philosophy of life but one aspect of such a set or philosophy. It may even be a non-essential aspect (e.g., atheistic Quakers, Buddhists, or Unitarian Universalists usually sit quite comfortably with their theistic kin). Many but by no means all non-religious atheists consider themselves humanists (lowercase h).2. A very brief description on why atheists don’t accept a belief in a god. Emphasize what you are not what you are not.3. You could expand on humanism (if you consider yourself one)
The Atheist's Creed:
I accept the natural world as all the world there is. I don't need a supernatural reason for anything.
I accept that the natural world is ultimately and completely knowable by logic and rational thought.
Religion is immoral. It prevents rationally moral behavior, discourages critical thinking and skepticism, invokes violence among its fundamentalist faithful, discriminates against women, minorities, and gays, treats children as chattel and victims, and encourages unhealthy sexual expression through legislation, violence, and guilt.
The Atheist’s Creed:I accept the natural world as all the world there is. I don’t need a supernatural reason for anything.I accept that the natural world is ultimately and completely knowable by logic and rational thought.Religion is immoral. It prevents rationally moral behavior, discourages critical thinking and skepticism, invokes violence among its fundamentalist faithful, discriminates against women, minorities, and gays, treats children as chattel and victims, and encourages unhealthy sexual expression through legislation, violence, and guilt.
Philip, why bring up natural selection?
Agnosticism and Atheism are not exclusive, just 2 different axis on the same graph.
Atheism isn't 'knowing' there are no gods. though some might add that they definitely know the Christian god doesn't exist.
A fair number of Atheists would be Agnostic Atheists.
Philip, why bring up natural selection?Agnosticism and Atheism are not exclusive, just 2 different axis on the same graph. Atheism isn’t ‘knowing’ there are no gods. though some might add that they definitely know the Christian god doesn’t exist. A fair number of Atheists would be Agnostic Atheists.
Humans are awesome by themselves and do need anything else to make them awesome.
The end.
Humans are awesome by themselves and do need anything else to make them awesome.The end.
@Wes who knew, .name is a valid Top Level Domain, that's actually kind of funn.
@Wes who knew, .name is a valid Top Level Domain, that’s actually kind of funn.
Too simple! My answer would be:
There is no God. It does not exist because there is no evidence for it. I don't have faith. I don't believe anything without reason. I don't see there is a need for an intelligent person to have faith. All we need is our mind and the ability to think and make choices.
Personally, I don't think it worth seven minutes.
Too simple! My answer would be:There is no God. It does not exist because there is no evidence for it. I don’t have faith. I don’t believe anything without reason. I don’t see there is a need for an intelligent person to have faith. All we need is our mind and the ability to think and make choices.Personally, I don’t think it worth seven minutes.
I wish I could sit in on this class!
I wish I could sit in on this class!
Who or what is god for me? Nothing, or as much as Santa is for you!
What is my faith based on? I don't place my faith in any one thing, I keep an open mind, and more importantly, a flexible mind, to accept that what we once knew can, and will, be superseded by new learning and increased knowledge of our surroundings.
Who or what is god for me? Nothing, or as much as Santa is for you!What is my faith based on? I don’t place my faith in any one thing, I keep an open mind, and more importantly, a flexible mind, to accept that what we once knew can, and will, be superseded by new learning and increased knowledge of our surroundings.
Jen: I should be flattered if you would borrow my Nigerian Letter analogy. Deal with the "you can't be absolutely sure there's no god" brigade by saying that you can't be absolutely sure that the widow of a dead dictator doesn't really want to give you 30 million dollars in return for a few hundred (she says), but that, all things considered, it's not the way to bet. IMHO this is more economical than getting into questions about epistemology and the burden of proof, so it's sort of a meta-Ockham. They say that you can't scam an honest man. That's not universally true, but you definitely can't scam an honest man with the 419. For it relies on dishonesty and greed in the mark, as well as stupidity. Now, most prayer is also about greed; you might be surprised how little christian prayer is about becoming a better person. Prayer is generally about getting ahead of the competition in some way; if, for example, you prayed to god to get you into Harvard and it did so, this would in the sublunary realm be considered undue influence, aka corruption. What about the other students? No one cares about them, any more than the magpies around your bird-feeder care about the robins. A flock of religionists praying is like a queue of fashionistas standing outside a club in the rain and begging the bouncer to let them in and leave the others in the cold. Except that, as David Lynch might say, no hay club.
What on earth is ethical about begging a man in the sky for what you want, often at others' expense?
Jen: I should be flattered if you would borrow my Nigerian Letter analogy. Deal with the “you can’t be absolutely sure there’s no god” brigade by saying that you can’t be absolutely sure that the widow of a dead dictator doesn’t really want to give you 30 million dollars in return for a few hundred (she says), but that, all things considered, it’s not the way to bet. IMHO this is more economical than getting into questions about epistemology and the burden of proof, so it’s sort of a meta-Ockham. They say that you can’t scam an honest man. That’s not universally true, but you definitely can’t scam an honest man with the 419. For it relies on dishonesty and greed in the mark, as well as stupidity. Now, most prayer is also about greed; you might be surprised how little christian prayer is about becoming a better person. Prayer is generally about getting ahead of the competition in some way; if, for example, you prayed to god to get you into Harvard and it did so, this would in the sublunary realm be considered undue influence, aka corruption. What about the other students? No one cares about them, any more than the magpies around your bird-feeder care about the robins. A flock of religionists praying is like a queue of fashionistas standing outside a club in the rain and begging the bouncer to let them in and leave the others in the cold. Except that, as David Lynch might say, no hay club. What on earth is ethical about begging a man in the sky for what you want, often at others’ expense?
– Who or what is God for you? (or what are your main objections about God)
God is an aware conscious being who took an active role in the creation of the universe. My main objections are that no being has ever been shown to exist. No religion has a mythology that has a consistant God figure.
– A summary of what you believe: Your faith
I believe, and I find the word faith here misleading as I do not believe based on faith but logic and reason, that there is no rational evidence for the existance of a god.
– What is your faith based on?
My own personal experience and study of world religions and the physical world. I grew up catholic and around 13 or 14 I realized I didn't really believe in Catholicism. It wasn't until I was like 17 or so that I realized there wasn't a god (I just hadn't thought of it. It was like "Well, Catholicism is BS." then later it was "hmm, god in general is BS.")
I don't know if this is helpful. It isn't what I would answer if speaking to an audience, but its just a quick blurb on what I think.
– Who or what is God for you? (or what are your main objections about God)God is an aware conscious being who took an active role in the creation of the universe. My main objections are that no being has ever been shown to exist. No religion has a mythology that has a consistant God figure. – A summary of what you believe: Your faithI believe, and I find the word faith here misleading as I do not believe based on faith but logic and reason, that there is no rational evidence for the existance of a god.- What is your faith based on?My own personal experience and study of world religions and the physical world. I grew up catholic and around 13 or 14 I realized I didn’t really believe in Catholicism. It wasn’t until I was like 17 or so that I realized there wasn’t a god (I just hadn’t thought of it. It was like “Well, Catholicism is BS.” then later it was “hmm, god in general is BS.”)I don’t know if this is helpful. It isn’t what I would answer if speaking to an audience, but its just a quick blurb on what I think.
You could mention how you are the only one that can actually answer the first question properly. Nobody can answer the question of "What is God?" They can say what God isn't, saying supernatural or not physical, but when asked what God is, nobody has an answer.
Needless to say, 7 minutes is quite a short period of time. I hope you do well. It's a tall order.
You could mention how you are the only one that can actually answer the first question properly. Nobody can answer the question of “What is God?” They can say what God isn’t, saying supernatural or not physical, but when asked what God is, nobody has an answer.Needless to say, 7 minutes is quite a short period of time. I hope you do well. It’s a tall order.
@givesgoodemail:
Wow, brilliant! I am going to learn that off by heart and use it every time I get accosted by a theist. That really puts it in a nutshell.
@givesgoodemail:Wow, brilliant! I am going to learn that off by heart and use it every time I get accosted by a theist. That really puts it in a nutshell.
What class is this for?
What class is this for?
"What are your main objections to the God concept?"
I'd first hit on the fact that the very concept (of either gods or the supernatural) is incoherent, and that everyone seems to argue for something different under the blanket term. Then I'd go into the "lots of religions talk about gods, only one maximum can be right, but it's more likely they're all wrong" thing and start to get into empiricism and the lack of evidence for the supernatural as a whole.
"Your faith"
I have no faith. Faith is belief without evidence; I prefer to use evidence when determining the veracity of claims. If I encounter evidence contrary to my beliefs, I will change them. Scepticism is not dogmatic. It is not only religious gods I reject, but all claims lacking evidence, especially supernatural claims.
“What are your main objections to the God concept?”I’d first hit on the fact that the very concept (of either gods or the supernatural) is incoherent, and that everyone seems to argue for something different under the blanket term. Then I’d go into the “lots of religions talk about gods, only one maximum can be right, but it’s more likely they’re all wrong” thing and start to get into empiricism and the lack of evidence for the supernatural as a whole.”Your faith”I have no faith. Faith is belief without evidence; I prefer to use evidence when determining the veracity of claims. If I encounter evidence contrary to my beliefs, I will change them. Scepticism is not dogmatic. It is not only religious gods I reject, but all claims lacking evidence, especially supernatural claims.
Awesome. I graduated Purdue last year, and I wish I was still there to see this panel.
I've watched many, many "Is there a God?" debates on YouTube, with Harris, Dawkins, Singer, etc. and I can tell you what is the most important point on which these things turn: you have to make it clear that it's the other guys who are pretending to know things they don't know. The preferred argument against atheism is that it's smug and overconfident, that it can't REALLY know what it says it "knows" – therefore you have to bring the point home that you WOULD believe in God if there were a shred of evidence. (Remember, everyone has experience with this kind of thinking: Christians know what it's like to see that the Greek gods are super unlikely, and you just feel that way about Yahweh, too.)
Awesome. I graduated Purdue last year, and I wish I was still there to see this panel.I’ve watched many, many “Is there a God?” debates on YouTube, with Harris, Dawkins, Singer, etc. and I can tell you what is the most important point on which these things turn: you have to make it clear that it’s the other guys who are pretending to know things they don’t know. The preferred argument against atheism is that it’s smug and overconfident, that it can’t REALLY know what it says it “knows” – therefore you have to bring the point home that you WOULD believe in God if there were a shred of evidence. (Remember, everyone has experience with this kind of thinking: Christians know what it’s like to see that the Greek gods are super unlikely, and you just feel that way about Yahweh, too.)
Just don't be defensive. Go in knowing that you have as positive a lifestance to describe as anyone else. If someone has a problem with that, who cares.
Just don’t be defensive. Go in knowing that you have as positive a lifestance to describe as anyone else. If someone has a problem with that, who cares.
Jen, some things for you to think about:
A) As others have suggested, starting off with a definition of 'atheism' as "one who does not accept the claim that there is a God or gods." You might want to point out that even Richard Dawkins labels himself as a 6 on a 7-point scale, and that you can be an atheist and still be "open" to the idea that there's a God if someone can provide sufficient evidence.
B) Then I would move to the notion that beliefs require evidence. A good example might be Carl Sagan's invisible dragon in your garage; assertions that are impervious to evidence are meaningless.
C) From there, I would explain the aphorism that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. An example I've used in previous talks is George Washington, and why we believe that he existed and was President, but why we're skeptical about the whole 'cherry tree' story.
D) Then, I would put it all together. Use the other panelists to your advantage. "Everyone on this panel except me thinks that they have extraordinary evidence — but none of them are willing to accept the extraordinary claims being made by anyone *else* on the panel." This suggests that none of them have anything extraordinary after all — what they have are the most ordinary, the most common forms of claims. Holy books. Personal experiences. Unanswered questions. Wild speculation. Some of them may point to vague or after-the-fact "prophecies" or supposed miracles that always fail the tests of science. They can't all be true, but they can all be wrong.
E) Invite anyone else on the panel (or in the audience) to show you actual evidence. You're willing to believe, if only it were true!
Jen, some things for you to think about:A) As others have suggested, starting off with a definition of ‘atheism’ as “one who does not accept the claim that there is a God or gods.” You might want to point out that even Richard Dawkins labels himself as a 6 on a 7-point scale, and that you can be an atheist and still be “open” to the idea that there’s a God if someone can provide sufficient evidence.B) Then I would move to the notion that beliefs require evidence. A good example might be Carl Sagan’s invisible dragon in your garage; assertions that are impervious to evidence are meaningless.C) From there, I would explain the aphorism that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. An example I’ve used in previous talks is George Washington, and why we believe that he existed and was President, but why we’re skeptical about the whole ‘cherry tree’ story.D) Then, I would put it all together. Use the other panelists to your advantage. “Everyone on this panel except me thinks that they have extraordinary evidence — but none of them are willing to accept the extraordinary claims being made by anyone *else* on the panel.” This suggests that none of them have anything extraordinary after all — what they have are the most ordinary, the most common forms of claims. Holy books. Personal experiences. Unanswered questions. Wild speculation. Some of them may point to vague or after-the-fact “prophecies” or supposed miracles that always fail the tests of science. They can’t all be true, but they can all be wrong.E) Invite anyone else on the panel (or in the audience) to show you actual evidence. You’re willing to believe, if only it were true!
I wouldn't go into atheism v agnosticism v whatever other labels. Just define atheism broadly, acknowledge that it includes a lot of people who don't use that label, and cite the ARIS 2008 survey that we are 15% of the population. Morality is something I would spend some time on. We don't eat babies, we're usually socially liberal, but generally we care about the same things everyone else does. Mentioning the Foundation Beyond Belief and their $12000 figure wouldn't be bad. Since there is a question there about what your faith is based on, I would talk a little bit about science and rationality and logic and stuff, but not go too deeply into it. I know this may be hard Jen, but don't try to explain evolution to them. The point in something like this is to say "we exist. We're your neighbors. We're good people. We're not going to steal your children." It's not about making arguments against the existence of god or bashing religion. Those things are fine for atheist club meetings, but they aren't what a religious diversity panel is about.
I wouldn’t go into atheism v agnosticism v whatever other labels. Just define atheism broadly, acknowledge that it includes a lot of people who don’t use that label, and cite the ARIS 2008 survey that we are 15% of the population. Morality is something I would spend some time on. We don’t eat babies, we’re usually socially liberal, but generally we care about the same things everyone else does. Mentioning the Foundation Beyond Belief and their $12000 figure wouldn’t be bad. Since there is a question there about what your faith is based on, I would talk a little bit about science and rationality and logic and stuff, but not go too deeply into it. I know this may be hard Jen, but don’t try to explain evolution to them. The point in something like this is to say “we exist. We’re your neighbors. We’re good people. We’re not going to steal your children.” It’s not about making arguments against the existence of god or bashing religion. Those things are fine for atheist club meetings, but they aren’t what a religious diversity panel is about.
I would just say something like:
We are to religion what baldness is to hair color. We simply don't have any belief in God. Now, that doesn't mean I'm absolutely certain that God doesn't exist, but then, until he proves otherwise, I'm going on that assumption.
See, atheists stand in favor of proofs and logic and reason and rationality, and against unsubstantiated claims. So, we kind of have a huge problem with this thing called "faith." To us, for example, when a Christian says, "Blessed are those who have not seen but still believe," it sounds like something a con artist would say–if the belief could actually be proven, the Christian could instead say, "Look right here! Here's God!" And that would be the end of it.
There's an old parable I've heard a number of times about two churches, and the specifics of it change depending on who tells it, but it basically goes like this: the first church teaches its followers that the sky is green. To this end, the followers pray to the green sky, sing hymns about how green the sky is, and chastise anyone who dares to 'sin' by saying the sky is some other color. An evil tempter, they say, makes you want to see other colors… But don't be fooled! Have faith that the sky is green! So says church #1.
The second church believes the sky is blue, unless there are clouds in the way, or it's morning or evening, when the sky may look red. Or nighttime, when it's very dark. A more complex belief, sure. But does this church have to sing hymns or pray about it? Do the followers have to repeat mantras or punish anyone who doubts? They probably don't even need a sermon. All the preacher at this church needs to do is take the congregation outside and say, "Look up." Because they have the distinct advantage of being correct, they don't have to resort to the methods of Church #1.
Religions make many claims: there's a God in heaven, or there's an afterlife, or one can be reincarnated as an animal, or there's a Devil in hell, or there's a spirit in a river, or something. And there are hymns to this God in heaven, prayers about this afterlife, stories of reincarnations, warnings of the Devil, dances to the spirits.
Did any one of them ever say, "Look up; what do you see?"
There are clouds. There's also a ground if you look down. There are humans and animals and trees and rivers. That's it. No Gods, no Devils, no spirits, no heaven, no hell. There is what there is. That's the world. It's not perfect, but then, its ours to help change and make better. Pray and sing all you like. Atheists are those who quit praying and, instead, focus on what's really here.
Of course, you don't have to take my word for any of this, or anyone else's word, for that matter. Just look up. And while you're at it, look around. Listen. And most importantly, THINK. We atheists are thinkers. We believe it's okay, and even necessary to have to see to believe–or hear, or at least have evidence. Atheism is pretty easy to understand if you understand just that.
I would just say something like:We are to religion what baldness is to hair color. We simply don’t have any belief in God. Now, that doesn’t mean I’m absolutely certain that God doesn’t exist, but then, until he proves otherwise, I’m going on that assumption.See, atheists stand in favor of proofs and logic and reason and rationality, and against unsubstantiated claims. So, we kind of have a huge problem with this thing called “faith.” To us, for example, when a Christian says, “Blessed are those who have not seen but still believe,” it sounds like something a con artist would say–if the belief could actually be proven, the Christian could instead say, “Look right here! Here’s God!” And that would be the end of it.There’s an old parable I’ve heard a number of times about two churches, and the specifics of it change depending on who tells it, but it basically goes like this: the first church teaches its followers that the sky is green. To this end, the followers pray to the green sky, sing hymns about how green the sky is, and chastise anyone who dares to ‘sin’ by saying the sky is some other color. An evil tempter, they say, makes you want to see other colors… But don’t be fooled! Have faith that the sky is green! So says church #1.The second church believes the sky is blue, unless there are clouds in the way, or it’s morning or evening, when the sky may look red. Or nighttime, when it’s very dark. A more complex belief, sure. But does this church have to sing hymns or pray about it? Do the followers have to repeat mantras or punish anyone who doubts? They probably don’t even need a sermon. All the preacher at this church needs to do is take the congregation outside and say, “Look up.” Because they have the distinct advantage of being correct, they don’t have to resort to the methods of Church #1.Religions make many claims: there’s a God in heaven, or there’s an afterlife, or one can be reincarnated as an animal, or there’s a Devil in hell, or there’s a spirit in a river, or something. And there are hymns to this God in heaven, prayers about this afterlife, stories of reincarnations, warnings of the Devil, dances to the spirits.Did any one of them ever say, “Look up; what do you see?”There are clouds. There’s also a ground if you look down. There are humans and animals and trees and rivers. That’s it. No Gods, no Devils, no spirits, no heaven, no hell. There is what there is. That’s the world. It’s not perfect, but then, its ours to help change and make better. Pray and sing all you like. Atheists are those who quit praying and, instead, focus on what’s really here.Of course, you don’t have to take my word for any of this, or anyone else’s word, for that matter. Just look up. And while you’re at it, look around. Listen. And most importantly, THINK. We atheists are thinkers. We believe it’s okay, and even necessary to have to see to believe–or hear, or at least have evidence. Atheism is pretty easy to understand if you understand just that.
As a Christian I have a few suggestions for things you should not say. I would discourage comparing religious people to con artists. Also, if you bring up the "skeptical/rational" stuff do not make it sound like atheists have a monopoly on rational thinking. Many atheists seem to do this without even realizing it.
As a Christian I have a few suggestions for things you should not say. I would discourage comparing religious people to con artists. Also, if you bring up the “skeptical/rational” stuff do not make it sound like atheists have a monopoly on rational thinking. Many atheists seem to do this without even realizing it.
@BathTub
I recommended mentioning natural selection because a large number of people don't seem to understand how things could come about without divine intervention. It is a bit off-topic, I understand, though upon further reflection (and reading comments here left by actual atheists, who know better than I what the full mindset is), I would say that a brief run-down of evolution could be used as a segue into things such as "The universe is knowable" and "We're the results of chance, and there's no deeper meaning to it."
@BathTubI recommended mentioning natural selection because a large number of people don’t seem to understand how things could come about without divine intervention. It is a bit off-topic, I understand, though upon further reflection (and reading comments here left by actual atheists, who know better than I what the full mindset is), I would say that a brief run-down of evolution could be used as a segue into things such as “The universe is knowable” and “We’re the results of chance, and there’s no deeper meaning to it.”
"The Bechrians", answered Autolycus, "have these peculiarities: They speak the truth, are monogamous and faithful to their wives, do not make war on their neighbors and, being wholly ignorant of the existence of any gods or goddesses, spend their lives without fear of retribution for their sins. They believe that when a man dies, he dies utterly, and therefore are unafraid of ghosts. Their land is also free of the fevers which plague their neighbors, and as fertile as one might wish. I have often considered settling among them; only that, when I came to die, my bones would remain unburied, which would be a terrible thing for a Greek as religious minded as myself."
Robert Graves – Hercules, My Shipmate p 245
“The Bechrians”, answered Autolycus, “have these peculiarities: They speak the truth, are monogamous and faithful to their wives, do not make war on their neighbors and, being wholly ignorant of the existence of any gods or goddesses, spend their lives without fear of retribution for their sins. They believe that when a man dies, he dies utterly, and therefore are unafraid of ghosts. Their land is also free of the fevers which plague their neighbors, and as fertile as one might wish. I have often considered settling among them; only that, when I came to die, my bones would remain unburied, which would be a terrible thing for a Greek as religious minded as myself.”Robert Graves – Hercules, My Shipmate p 245
Everyone else has said it all so let me just say good luck! I look forward to hearing how it goes.
Everyone else has said it all so let me just say good luck! I look forward to hearing how it goes.
@ Jake
As a former Christian for 23 years, I stand by my full statement, as it's worded, including the con artist part. There are things Christians say and do without realizing it, too, y'know.
As for a monopoly on rational thinking? Not in all areas of life, no. People of faith can be perfectly good doctors, lawyers, firefighters, teachers, you name it. But "faith" is a word that specifically means you are abandoning rational thinking. As Martin Luther put it, "Reason is the enemy of faith." I would say "opposite" rather than "enemy," but the point stands.
@ JakeAs a former Christian for 23 years, I stand by my full statement, as it’s worded, including the con artist part. There are things Christians say and do without realizing it, too, y’know.As for a monopoly on rational thinking? Not in all areas of life, no. People of faith can be perfectly good doctors, lawyers, firefighters, teachers, you name it. But “faith” is a word that specifically means you are abandoning rational thinking. As Martin Luther put it, “Reason is the enemy of faith.” I would say “opposite” rather than “enemy,” but the point stands.
Atheism.about.com has a treasure-trove of information regarding atheism & agnosticism. If you're not already familiar with the site, check it out:
http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutatheism/p/atheism101.htm
Atheism.about.com has a treasure-trove of information regarding atheism & agnosticism. If you’re not already familiar with the site, check it out:http://atheism.about.com/od/ab…
Good luck Jen, any possiblity of recording it? The whole presentation idea sounds very interesting. Some good suggestions above. I am sure you will represent us well.
Quatguy
Good luck Jen, any possiblity of recording it? The whole presentation idea sounds very interesting. Some good suggestions above. I am sure you will represent us well.Quatguy
Damn…
I wish I'd found your blog a week earlier. I did an 8 minute speech on atheism for my Oral Communications class a couple of semesters ago.
Damn… I wish I’d found your blog a week earlier. I did an 8 minute speech on atheism for my Oral Communications class a couple of semesters ago.
You’ve probably already conducted your presentation, but after reading a few of the comments and being a fellow atheist, I’d like to share my ideas about morality and non-theism (love the term, by the by). I took an English class this last semester and had to come up with an oral presentation and I decided to do it on morality, and this is what I came up with: human morality comes from evolutionary forces. If it hurts our species, chances are it’s considered morally wrong (by this I mean that a substantial portion of society considers it as somehow wrong). This is why we have so many morally ambiguous issues: abortion (survival/well-being of mother vs. (potential) life of unborn fetus), euthanasia (killing is ‘wrong’, but so is suffering), etc. Also, since cultures have had different histories and have therefore evolved differently, we see variances in the idea of morality from one society to another.
@ Philip–I know you posted this three weeks ago–I just came across it now while wandering on blag hag…Anyway.. I liked your first suggestion in your paragraph about “one less god”–but I was a bit unclear as to what you meant by “including a few words on how atheists don’t see higher meaning or purpose in anything, including human consciousness and existence..” For transparency’s sake–I call myself an “agnostic atheist”–I don’t believe in anything supernatural–but don’t claim certainty of this belief or equate it to certafiable knowledge. I do think that supernatural gods are rather improbable–but that’s as far as I would go.. In any case–back to the point–I find meaning in human consciousness and existence–but I’m not sure what you mean by “higher” meaning? Higher than what? I think life is grand, that my friends are awesome, that we, as humans, have responsibilities towards ourselves, towards others, and towards making this society and world a better place. All of this has meaning for me–but it has meaning because I choose to give it meaning… not because I believe in the existence of something external to me that tells me these things have meaning and purpose.. So.. if you could clarify this a bit–or just add your thoughts.. I’d be really appreciative. I’m not trying to be snarky or aggressive here–but am genuinely curious.. Thanks,Joshua
Yes.. this is what I usually use–theism vs atheism is an axis that describes whether someone does or does not believe in supernatural entities and phenomenon.Gnosticism vs Agnosticism has to do with whether we claim to have KNOWLEDGE (==gnosis) of said entities and phenomenon–and I tend to use Aristotle’s definition that knowledge is something that has to do with the certainty with which certain opinions/beliefs/observations are held to be true.Thus–because I don’t believe–but I’m not willing to claim certainty about these beliefs (no matter that I think that supernatural entities are very unlikely…) –I’m an agnostic atheist… It sure would be nice if more people paid attention to such things.. it would eliminate a lot of needless arguments…