Atheism Plus

[E. Nato Difficile]

Atheism + has arrived, and this is its manifesto:

We are…
Atheists plus we care about social justice,
Atheists plus we support women’s rights,
Atheists plus we protest racism,
Atheists plus we fight homophobia and transphobia,
Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism.

According to Richard Carrier at freethoughtblogs:

" Do you identify as an atheist? Then I can’t insist, but I do ask that you to defend these goals and values (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you with the Atheism+ movement, or do you at least cheer and approve it’s values and aims (since you don’t have to label yourself), or are you going to stick with Atheism Less and its sexism and cruelty and irrationality?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid."

Anyone else a little troubled by this? I never had the impression that there was too much freethought in atheism, or that we needed to enforce conformity of opinion among nonbelievers. I have no problem with atheists supporting a social agenda, and the aims of Atheism + seem valid. But I'm not so glad to see atheists demonizing one another just like religious people have done for millennia.

-Nato

 

[Storm]

I've heard a bit about this group - namely that they're rabid ant-theists and misandrists.

 

[Revoltingest]

Atheism + has arrived, and this is its manifesto:


According to Richard Carrier at freethoughtblogs:

" Do you identify as an atheist? Then I can’t insist, but I do ask that you to defend these goals and values (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you with the Atheism+ movement, or do you at least cheer and approve it’s values and aims (since you don’t have to label yourself), or are you going to stick with Atheism Less and its sexism and cruelty and irrationality?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid."

Anyone else a little troubled by this? I never had the impression that there was too much freethought in atheism, or that we needed to enforce conformity of opinion among nonbelievers. I have no problem with atheists supporting a social agenda, and the aims of Atheism + seem valid. But I'm not so glad to see atheists demonizing one another just like religious people have done for millennia.

-Nato

I suspect that those "plus" values are typical of atheists, but I don't know.
Any data out there?

Would we have to start wearing plus size clothing?

 

[mycorrhiza]

What's the difference between this "atheism+" and secular humanism?

 

[Storm]

What's the difference between this "atheism+" and secular humanism?

Going by nothing but the quote in the op, I see a pretty glaring with us or against us mentality. That's never good.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

As someone who posted on iidb very early on, I have a soft spot in my heart for Carrier, but a "and-we're-kinda-nice-too" Manifesto (manifesto no less) strikes me as bit underwhelming.

 

[Revoltingest]

What's the difference between this "atheism+" and secular humanism?

Secular humanism would include the faithful.
I have no problem rubbing elbows with secular humanists.....as long as they don't start preaching or speaking in tongues.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I'm witholding judgement until more info is available. But, based on what I've seen so far, I'm reluctant to be enthusiastic.

 

[Noaidi]

The issues listed have nothing to do with atheism. It's up to the individual to accept or reject the causes / campaigns, but they have no influence on whether that person believes in gods or not.
Not sure why an atheist who fights for these causes should be regarded as an "atheist plus".
I prefer the label "humanitarian" or something similar.

 

[9Westy9]

I really don't see the point behind this. The only real difference I can see between this and secular humanism is the atheism part.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Atheism+ is kinda silly. I say this as a former weak atheist (god beat me in an arm-wrestling contest).

IMO, it's an attempt to co-opt secular humanism under the mantle of anti-theism.

Does secular humanism have natural synergy with atheism? Sure, but this sort of thing is inherently exclusivist, and it refashions atheism into a qusai-religion by attaching theistic views (or lack thereof) to an ethical system and, far worse, a social movement. What does this means? It means that atheism+ will be subject to many of the social criticisms that religions have incurred upon themselves.

 

[mycorrhiza]

Going by nothing but the quote in the op, I see a pretty glaring with us or against us mentality. That's never good.

Yeah, I noticed that when I read the post more closely. It makes them sound kinda like a cult

 

[idav]

I've heard a bit about this group - namely that they're rabid ant-theists and misandrists.

Those equality extremists are the worst LOL. My my protesting racism and "fighting" homophobia. Does fighting homophobia mean being anti-theist, it might to some of the fundamentalists.

 

[Revoltingest]

Atheism+ is kinda silly. I say this as a former weak atheist (god beat me in an arm-wrestling contest).
IMO, it's an attempt to co-opt secular humanism under the mantle of anti-theism.
Does secular humanism have natural synergy with atheism? Sure, but this sort of thing is inherently exclusivist, and it refashions atheism into a qusai-religion by attaching theistic views (or lack thereof) to an ethical system and, far worse, a social movement. What does this means? It means that atheism+ will be subject to many of the social criticisms that religions have incurred upon themselves.

Perhaps some atheists just want to present us as a positive example, eh?
We're not just puppy eating destroyers of western civilization. We're more!

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Anyone else a little troubled by this? I never had the impression that there was too much freethought in atheism, or that we needed to enforce conformity of opinion among nonbelievers. I have no problem with atheists supporting a social agenda, and the aims of Atheism + seem valid. But I'm not so glad to see atheists demonizing one another just like religious people have done for millennia.

-Nato

I'm not troubled by Atheism+; I'm encouraged by it.

I think that it's an acknowledgement of the fact that while atheism itself says very little, many atheists share a wide range of views.

I don't see this as a matter of "demonizing one another". I see this as a matter of a group of people carving out a niche for themselves.

What's the difference between this "atheism+" and secular humanism?

Secular humanism is not necessarily atheist; it's compatible with atheism, but doesn't require it. In atheism+, a person's stance on social issues is informed by their atheism, so atheism is a prerequisite.

The end goals overlap, but the motivations are different.

Also, I've heard stories of secular humanist groups where atheists were discouraged from mentioning their atheism. In atheism+, it's practically a given that atheists will be welcome.

The issues listed have nothing to do with atheism. It's up to the individual to accept or reject the causes / campaigns, but they have no influence on whether that person believes in gods or not.
Not sure why an atheist who fights for these causes should be regarded as an "atheist plus".
I prefer the label "humanitarian" or something similar.

I'm a secular humanist, but I'm a secular humanist largely because of my atheism.

My skepticism informs my atheism; my atheism and my skepticism both inform my stance on social issues. While I'm happy to cooperate with anyone who's trying to achieve the same goals I am, I recognize that not all secular humanists or "humanitarians" necessarily share my motivations. I see value in participating in a community with people who not only share my goals, but share my motivations as well.

Also, I see this as a logical next step in social regard toward atheists:

- we started out with people thinking that religion was necessary to be a good person.
- the secular humanists established that religion wasn't necessary to be a good person.
- Atheism+ acknowledges that for some people, atheism can motivate them to be a better person than they would be otherwise.

 

[outhouse]

I've heard a bit about this group - namely that they're rabid ant-theists and misandrists.

Im part of this group and involved in their forums due to a higher knowledge content then most. Many authors visit and participate daily.

they are not as anti theist as you think, they are just allowed the freedom to express theirselves a little more. The same people are here, just not silenced.

creationist are welcome but dont stand a chance as science and knowledge shuts them down asap, depending on ow stubborn they are.

they dont hate men.





with that said Im in a constant daily fight against lack of education and mythicist views that do constitute the majority.

Theres only a handful there fighting for mainstream scholarships, and that ones that do, are extremely educated on the subject enough to argue with Carrier in some topics.

 

[outhouse]

Perhaps some atheists just want to present us as a positive example, eh?
We're not just puppy eating destroyers of western civilization. We're more!

ding ding ding, we have a winner


all their trying to do is promote positive aspects of a higher learning.



theist do not have a patent on morals

 

[Noaidi]

I'm a secular humanist, but I'm a secular humanist largely because of my atheism.

That's where we differ, I suppose. My lack of belief in gods has no bearing on my social concerns. To me, they don't overlap nor do they influence each other.

The only instance I can think of where my atheism has a bearing is my refusal to donate to any charity with religious affiliations. I seek out charities that are purely secular, the reason being that I don't want my money being spent on any bibles or preachers instead of aid. But my concern for the cause is not a result of my atheism.

 

[Storm]

Im part of this group and involved in their forums due to a higher knowledge content then most. Many authors visit and participate daily.

they are not as anti theist as you think, they are just allowed the freedom to express theirselves a little more. The same people are here, just not silenced.

creationist are welcome but dont stand a chance as science and knowledge shuts them down asap, depending on ow stubborn they are.

they dont hate men.





with that said Im in a constant daily fight against lack of education and mythicist views that do constitute the majority.

Theres only a handful there fighting for mainstream scholarships, and that ones that do, are extremely educated on the subject enough to argue with Carrier in some topics.

Just saying what I've been told. (By an atheistic feminist, ftr)

 

[Skwim]

What's the difference between this "atheism+" and secular humanism?

From Wikipedia (because they're good definitions).

Atheism in a broad sense is merely "the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."

Secular humanism is "the philosophy or life stance secular humanism (alternatively known by some adherents as Humanism, specifically with a capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism) embraces human reason, ethics, social justice, philosophical naturalism, while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making."

For a large part secular humanists are atheists and agnostics, but atheists and agnostics may well not be secular humanists.