Atheism is stupid, according to Carl Sagan. I agree with his view and here is the reason why. The word atheism started to gain attention in the 15th century when christian era ruled. The christian leaders at that time gave the word a negative meaning ex. evil, bad, possessed and reinforced the belief and fear by actual torture. When this word is used by the common christian, their preconditioned brain automatically shuts down their ability to reason. I use a new positive word to help in a discussion about religion and that word is “catheist”. This way i get a chance to discuss and explain how my own beliefs in a god have changed without them prejudging me. It keeps the discussion going. Definition: Catheist is a person who does not know if there is a god.
Atheism is stupid, according to Carl Sagan. I agree with his view and here is the reason why. The word atheism started to gain attention in the 15th century when christian era ruled. The christian leaders at that time gave the word a negative meaning ex. evil, bad, possessed and reinforced the belief and fear by actual torture. When this word is used by the common christian, their preconditioned brain automatically shuts down their ability to reason. I use a new positive word to help in a discussion about religion and that word is "catheist". This way i get a chance to discuss and explain how my own beliefs in a god have changed without them prejudging me. It keeps the discussion going. Definition: Catheist is a person who does not know if there is a god.How does that differ from agnostic? In fact, no one on earth knows if there is a god, theists and atheists alike. Lois
Hi LoisL. We agree. if a person asks me what a catheist is, I have the opportunity to exchange information with that person. Every person of any faith will automatically shut down and the chance to to cause doubt is lost, when they hear the word atheist. with all the different names people have created to identify themselves with it is like a bunch of cats. I guess I want action now while I am still here.
If a person asks me what a catheist is, I have the opportunity to exchange information with that person. Every person of any faith will automatically shut down and the chance to to cause doubt is lost, when they hear the word atheist.Grand Pa, I remember you making this same claim when you first came to this forum. And I remember asking you at that time how that was working for you. What I mean is, AFTER you've explained what a "catheist" is (in other words, a person who doesn't believe in God), do they STILL "exchange information" with you, or do they run away, murmuring that you sound like an atheist? You never did answer that question. I don't get why you feel it necessary to insult those of us who don't mind the term atheist. Does it make you feel superior or smarter or something? For the record, even though I embrace the term, I rarely if ever describe myself to other people as an atheist. If they ask what my religion is, I say "Secular Humanist". And then I usually have to explain what it means.
Advocatus, Be careful, Carl Sagan was one of the smartest people who ever lived. He had the ability to inform others in a clear language and he spoke plainly. The CATS have done a good job over the last 2000 years, that is too slow for me.
Advocatus, catheist is a former christian who cannot say there is or is not a god.
When someone quotes a famous person, I usually look for context.
Quotes like these have led some to believe that he was an atheist, but this is not true. He hated the term. Much like Charles Darwin, Sagan recognized that claiming that there is no God is as irrational as claiming there is one. He once said: "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid." In a March 1996 profile by Jim Dawson in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sagan talked about his then-new book The Demon Haunted World and was asked about his personal spiritual views: “My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it . . . An agnostic is somebody who doesn’t believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I’m agnostic."The quote is, "by some definitions...". People should be allowed to identify themselves. We live in a world of changing ideas about labels. If I meet someone who appears to be an American descended from Americans before Columbus got here, I ask them how they want to be identified. Religion is even more complicated. The vast majority of Christians don't accept most of what they say when they recite the Nicaean Creed. As quoted above, "agnostic" to him means he doesn't give spirituality much thought. Some agnostic think about what god might be every day. The word itself is not that helpful when trying to understand the person.
Advocatus, Be careful, Carl Sagan was one of the smartest people who ever lived.And what in the name of Gene Roddenberry does THAT have to do with anything? Read Lausten's post above for how you misquoted him. I'm not trying to give you a hard time, Grand Pa; I'm just trying to get a simple answer to a simple question.
He [Carl Sagan] had the ability to inform others in a clear language and he spoke plainly.Which is evidently more than you are capable of doing.
The CATS have done a good job over the last 2000 years, that is too slow for me.What are "CATS"? Am I supposed to know what "CATS" are? And by the way, you STILL have not answered the question, have you?
If a person asks me what a catheist is, I have the opportunity to exchange information with that person. Every person of any faith will automatically shut down and the chance to to cause doubt is lost, when they hear the word atheist.Grand Pa, I remember you making this same claim when you first came to this forum. And I remember asking you at that time how that was working for you. What I mean is, AFTER you've explained what a "catheist" is (in other words, a person who doesn't believe in God), do they STILL "exchange information" with you, or do they run away, murmuring that you sound like an atheist? You never did answer that question. I don't get why you feel it necessary to insult those of us who don't mind the term atheist. Does it make you feel superior or smarter or something? For the record, even though I embrace the term, I rarely if ever describe myself to other people as an atheist. If they ask what my religion is, I say "Secular Humanist". And then I usually have to explain what it means. In fact that's the right thing to say if you are being asked about your religion. Humanism can be defined as a religion, but not atheism. Atheism is a statement about belief in god(s). It isn't a statement about the existence of god(s), nor is it a religion. Lois
When someone quotes a famous person, I usually look for context.What is this "spirituality" agnostics don't give much thought to? And how do you know they don't? LoisQuotes like these have led some to believe that he was an atheist, but this is not true. He hated the term. Much like Charles Darwin, Sagan recognized that claiming that there is no God is as irrational as claiming there is one. He once said: "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid." In a March 1996 profile by Jim Dawson in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sagan talked about his then-new book The Demon Haunted World and was asked about his personal spiritual views: “My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it . . . An agnostic is somebody who doesn’t believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I’m agnostic."The quote is, "by some definitions...". People should be allowed to identify themselves. We live in a world of changing ideas about labels. If I meet someone who appears to be an American descended from Americans before Columbus got here, I ask them how they want to be identified. Religion is even more complicated. The vast majority of Christians don't accept most of what they say when they recite the Nicaean Creed. As quoted above, "agnostic" to him means he doesn't give spirituality much thought. Some agnostic think about what god might be every day. The word itself is not that helpful when trying to understand the person.
When someone quotes a famous person, I usually look for context.What is this "spirituality" agnostics don't give much thought to? And how do you know they don't? Lois Why do you ask? Do you think it is a stretch to say that some people think about that and some don't? I don't really care what they think it is, I'm merely stating that the term "agnostic" doesn't tell you how much or even what they think it means.Quotes like these have led some to believe that he was an atheist, but this is not true. He hated the term. Much like Charles Darwin, Sagan recognized that claiming that there is no God is as irrational as claiming there is one. He once said: "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid." In a March 1996 profile by Jim Dawson in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sagan talked about his then-new book The Demon Haunted World and was asked about his personal spiritual views: “My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it . . . An agnostic is somebody who doesn’t believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I’m agnostic."The quote is, "by some definitions...". People should be allowed to identify themselves. We live in a world of changing ideas about labels. If I meet someone who appears to be an American descended from Americans before Columbus got here, I ask them how they want to be identified. Religion is even more complicated. The vast majority of Christians don't accept most of what they say when they recite the Nicaean Creed. As quoted above, "agnostic" to him means he doesn't give spirituality much thought. Some agnostic think about what god might be every day. The word itself is not that helpful when trying to understand the person.
When someone quotes a famous person, I usually look for context.What is this "spirituality" agnostics don't give much thought to? And how do you know they don't? Lois Why do you ask? Do you think it is a strYetch to say that some people think about that and some don't? I don't really care what they think it is, I'm merely stating that the term "agnostic" doesn't tell you how much or even what they think it means. That's true. Most people use it wrong, anyway. They seem to think it's a third choice betweeen theism and atheism. It is not. Atheism and theism are statements on belief in god(s). Agnosticism is a statement on knowledge. Never the twain shall meet. Ask someone who calls himself an agnostic if he believes any god exists. If he says "no", he's an atheist. If he says "yes", he's a theist. If he says, "I don't know", he's an idiot. LoisQuotes like these have led some to believe that he was an atheist, but this is not true. He hated the term. Much like Charles Darwin, Sagan recognized that claiming that there is no God is as irrational as claiming there is one. He once said: "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid." In a March 1996 profile by Jim Dawson in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sagan talked about his then-new book The Demon Haunted World and was asked about his personal spiritual views: “My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it . . . An agnostic is somebody who doesn’t believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I’m agnostic."The quote is, "by some definitions...". People should be allowed to identify themselves. We live in a world of changing ideas about labels. If I meet someone who appears to be an American descended from Americans before Columbus got here, I ask them how they want to be identified. Religion is even more complicated. The vast majority of Christians don't accept most of what they say when they recite the Nicaean Creed. As quoted above, "agnostic" to him means he doesn't give spirituality much thought. Some agnostic think about what god might be every day. The word itself is not that helpful when trying to understand the person.
That's true. Most people use it wrong, anyway. They seem to think it's a third choice betweeen theism and atheism. It is not. Atheism and theism are statements on belief in god(s). Agnosticism is a statement on knowledge. Never the twain shall meet. Ask someone who calls himself an agnostic if he believes any god exists. If he says "no", he's an atheist. If he says "yes", he's a theist. If he says, "I don't know", he's an idiot. LoisNice. There's a meme waiting to be created there.
Atheism is stupid, according to Carl Sagan. I agree with his view and here is the reason why. The word atheism started to gain attention in the 15th century when christian era ruled. The christian leaders at that time gave the word a negative meaning ex. evil, bad, possessed and reinforced the belief and fear by actual torture. When this word is used by the common christian, their preconditioned brain automatically shuts down their ability to reason. I use a new positive word to help in a discussion about religion and that word is "catheist". This way i get a chance to discuss and explain how my own beliefs in a god have changed without them prejudging me. It keeps the discussion going. Definition: Catheist is a person who does not know if there is a god.Did Carl Sagan saynthat? How odd, since he said elsewhere that he, himself, was an atheist. Do you have a source for this statement? Lois
Atheism is stupid, according to Carl Sagan. I agree with his view and here is the reason why. The word atheism started to gain attention in the 15th century when christian era ruled. The christian leaders at that time gave the word a negative meaning ex. evil, bad, possessed and reinforced the belief and fear by actual torture. When this word is used by the common christian, their preconditioned brain automatically shuts down their ability to reason. I use a new positive word to help in a discussion about religion and that word is "catheist". This way i get a chance to discuss and explain how my own beliefs in a god have changed without them prejudging me. It keeps the discussion going. Definition: Catheist is a person who does not know if there is a god.Did Carl Sagan saynthat? How odd, since he said elsewhere that he, himself, was an atheist. Do you have a source for this statement? Lois I see that Sagan did say a few things to that effect, but what he was doing was completely misdefining what an atheist is, which is surprising coming from an otherwise astute person. He is quoted as having said to Stephen Jay Gould “I am not an atheist. An atheist is someone who has compelling evidence that there is no Judeo-Christian-Islamic God." That is absolutely wrong. That is not what an atheist is and the vast majority of actual atheists will attest to it. I know of no atheist who says he has evidence that there is no god. Atheists know better than to make such an outrageous statement. "I am not that wise, but neither do I consider there to be anything approaching adequate evidence for such a god." Nor has any rational atheist. I am beginning to have serious doubts about Sagan's ability to think through such an issue. I did not know about this egregious lapse in his judgement. Lois
We are all products of our time. Sagan was contemporary with Madalyn Murray O’Hair, a very hated atheist. Sagan was trying to get people to be comfortable with science. He didn’t have others around to bounce off his meme ideas. He was trying to create sound bites.
All that, plus, he never flat out said “atheism is stupid” and went on to defend that. He said it in a context that grandpa has ignored.
I never could read someone’s mind and it amazing that some people can do that. The Greeks simply put the letter “A” in front of a word to show the opposite, thus the word atheist. Only one big problem. The theists had almost everyone killed or tortured and it is still going on. The Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders defined the term atheist and it still has the same negative meaning. That is a good reason not to use the term. The term has had a negative effect for over 2000 years. It shuts down communications and that helps no one. Atheists are like a herd of cats, there is very little unity and strength that people can see.
True, not all atheists follow one drum. That’s what being free from dogma will do for you. Unlike many things that you can choose not to do or not to believe in, not believing in god goes to the core of someone’s thoughts about who they are. It doesn’t matter so much if I don’t like someone’s car or their shoes, so the word a-Chevy was never created. But as you pointed out, all sorts of requirements can be put upon me to believe and consequences if I don’t. And even in a world of tamed religion and freedom of choice, people still claim harm if I state my non-belief.
So, there are reasons from both directions to claim my atheism. One, it is my right, and I should not be discriminated against or even considered immoral for my choice, two, the harm felt by others is their problem. They need to work that out and figure out how to live in a pluralistic world where “love your neighbor” means being considerate of everyone.
I never could read someone's mind and it amazing that some people can do that. The Greeks simply put the letter "A" in front of a word to show the opposite, thus the word atheist. Only one big problem. The theists had almost everyone killed or tortured and it is still going on. The Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders defined the term atheist and it still has the same negative meaning. That is a good reason not to use the term. The term has had a negative effect for over 2000 years. It shuts down communications and that helps no one. Atheists are like a herd of cats, there is very little unity and strength that people can see.Are you saying people can't see unity and strength in atheists because atheists insist on calling themselves atheists? Christians and Muslim leaders also defined the term Jew and it still has a negative meaning. Jews were tortured by many people, Christians being the worst perpetrators. Would you suggest that Jews stop calling themselves Jews because the name itself sets some people off? Christians have been demonized, too. Would you suggest that Christians call themselves something else? Aren't you playing a very macabre game of blaming the victim? They should change their identity because it brings out the worst in some people? Lois
Lois, I was suggesting something that has not been tried. The object is to get people to think. Check out Steven Pinker, it is not a game, words are important.