Hey! I’m going to be speaking at an Iowa Atheists event tomorrow, which has me mildly shocked. I hope I haven’t forgotten how to talk, or worse, that the only thing I can talk about is spiders (No! Do not talk about spiders! People find it either boring or horrifying!)
It’s been a long time. You know, I’ve been effectively blacklisted by all the major atheist organizations because I’ve loudly criticized some of the atheist saints, like Dawkins and Harris and Hitchens, and then got attached to some hated shibboleths like feminism (but I’m not a woman), or gay liberation (but I’m straight), or trans rights (I’m also not trans), or some other heresy. The last time I talked to an atheist organization about speaking was about ten years ago, and that was painfully tentative — the person I spoke with wanted to check my availability, but they were afraid that some members of their group hated me so much that they’d veto the suggestion…which is what happened, I guess, because I never heard from them again.
Just as well. I’ve got an hour or more of macrophotos and videos of spiders that no one would want to see, anyway. If any of those groups that blacklisted me somehow decided to bring me on, that’s what they’d get, and it would serve them right.
Today I’m driving to the Twin Cities. Tomorrow at 2pm in Des Moines I’ll be talking about social justice, instead, which would make them cry even harder.
Time has told.
If the atheist movement is unable to clean its own house, it has no standing to criticize the problems of others.
Possible statement to make if the audience turns out to be a bunch of a-holes:
“Just to let you know, I released a few thousand invisible deadly spiders in this room as I was coming in. If you feel a little itch-like sensation, it might be an itch, or might not.”
Welcome!
The girl’s state high school basketball championships are this weekend. Might be a little crowded in DM.
I, for one, would LOVE to see more spider videos! I’m currently working on a spider presentation for seventh graders as part of my master naturalist certification.
I wish I still lived in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. I would have made the drive over. It’s a bit far from Chicago, sorry. And since the last time I attended an Iowa Atheists event they hosted David Silvermen…it would be good to get that taint off. That was probably 12 years ago. To Snarki’s comment, the people I met then were good people. Too bad there were so many crappy atheists in national leadership. I generally found the people at the grassroots level to be good people…except for this one lesbian woman from Davenport, IA. She was an awful conservative who disliked how the Davenport group labeled themselves as “Humanists.” OK, and then there was a time three white guys in a Cedar Rapids group were bemoaning how the Republican party abandoned them because they discriminated against atheists. All the racism, sexism, etc, apparently didn’t bother them. That was when I fully called it quits with any organized atheism.
Anyway, I am not expecting you to really follow through on this, PZ, but if a guy named Rory is still with the group (I suppose he’d be in his upper 50’s now), you can tell him that Leo says “Hello.” He seemed to be one of the good guys and he wanted me to take more leadership responsibility with organized atheism in the Cedar Rapids area those 12 years ago…right when I became disillusioned with the movement. So I essentially quiet quit on him. Not one of my prouder moments. The quiet part, not the quitting, to be clear. Definitely glad to have quit. But I should have been more respectful with poor Rory.
You should mention that Ayn Rand was an atheist, which proves even atheists can be collossal wankers.
And maybe you can mention that the Earliest vertebrate ancestors may have had four eyes, which is at least halfway to spider standard?
I do hope things are about to change. Diversity of voices is important, and if you don’t take it too seriously, a little infighting can also be dreadfully jolly.
I still consume media of some atheists you hate (sorry) in parallel to your blog, and I try to find my own synthesis.
I would like to suggest this to PZ on how to approach the talk to that organization:
Our organization has always considered (secular) Humanism a positive statement expressing a lot of what we are, while atheism is a somewhat negative expression of what you are not.
shermanj, that would be misleading.
Humanism is not itself theistic (or whatever), but it is not restricted to atheists.
Different things.
(Right? Iowa Atheists, not Iowa Humanists)
John, I think I understand what you are saying. I don’t want to get into minute semantic nuances, but, all I’ve read at the major humanist sites does imply that (as I wrote) humanism is secular, which precludes theism and distinctly includes atheism as a sub-tenet. Also, as PZ has discussed, I hope that group of atheists would hold such moral/ethical values that they would not object to PZ discussing all the positive traits of humanism, which includes social justice, since it is an intrinsic characteristic of the prescribed humanist principles.
Of course, it’s up to PZ to decide what he will discuss.
shermanj–
Those words are prone to misuse and misunderstanding, so unfortunately it becomes essential to define them closely. For instance, atheism is compatible with secularism but is not a sub-tenet of it. Secularism precludes theocracy, but does not preclude theism. Humanism implies secularism but is not equivalent. European humanism arose from religious believers (Paine, Rousseau, Spinoza, Hobbes, Comte, Mirandola) as well as non-believers (Diderot, Holyoake).
There is even a modern movement that calls itself Christian Humanism. (Personally, I think it shows a lack of historical and philosophical rigour at the very foundational level — but nevertheless it exists and can’t be defined away.) Note that this is separate from historians’ meaning of Christian Humanism, which applies to Renaissance figures.
PZ most certainly practices and advocates humanism, and has for a long time.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZ_Myers#Awards)
He also advocated for A+ back when it was a thing (it never got traction).
It’s basically also humanism+.
(https://religions.wiki/index.php/Atheism_plus)
Things atheists don’t have to worry about:
Lenten guidelines: Is faux meat allowed on Fridays?
Reginald, it is also a thing that Catholics don’t have to worry about.
(Stupid thing to write)
@11 chrislawson wrote: Those words are prone to misuse and misunderstanding, so unfortunately it becomes essential to define them closely.
I reply: I agree with the need for concise definition. I erroneously presumed that those following the discussions here would be cognizant of contemporary Secular Humanist tenets. Please allow me to explain my thoughts more fully:
I think I am accurately portraying what John Morales pointed out @12 when he wrote: “PZ “advocated for Atheism Plus . . It’s basically humanism+” ”
PZ calls himself an atheist and yet, clearly, as evidenced by his writings and his acceptance of numerous humanist awards, his values system also includes many of the philosophical tenets found in secular humanism.
I call your attention PZ’s article https://abouthumanism.com/secular-humanism-vs-atheism/ Secular humanism and atheism are two distinct yet closely related philosophical positions. Both reject the idea of a divine being but differ in their approach to life, morality, and society.
Based on extensive thoughtful study and objective analysis by all the members of our organization I agree with them that atheism is a limited single idea, a subset, of the full spectrum of ideas that is secular humanism. We see and subscribe to a venn diagram that would clearly show the conceptual and philosophical fullness and positive complexity of the whole circle as accurately representing secular humanism, which exceeds, encompasses and includes the single atheist tenet of rejection of gods or deities, as only a subset contained within the secular humanism circle.