The one thing that baptists, catholics, episcopalians, etc. all have in common is that they are christian. We have the atheists, agnostics, humanists, godless, brights, and (large number of) skeptics, etc, but we have no umbrella term that we can rally behind. We have a need for a term, any term that we can all agree on to find some commonality. There are vastly different philosophies between the various groups, (although maybe not as much as say catholics and YEC evangelicals). I agree with the "leaders" that atheist is a poor way to categorize something. ThunderF00t (of youtube fame) either came up with or is promoting PEARL

What does everyone think?


Views: 347

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm an agnostic atheist freethinking skeptic with a naturalistic worldview.
I even subscribe to the Bright's newsletter, although I feel they'd best sell their name to a solar-panel manufacturing company.
But don't you dare call me a pearl or I'll tell my elder brother and he'll whack you on the head.

Seriously - If it makes you feel better to call yourself WOOMBIT, SHICKLEWICK or SHIFFISH - go ahead and do it, I won't pass judgement on you. I just don't feel the need for a new name when there are already so many out there.
Brian wrote on March 23 ah i c. well that's kind of like comparing apples and oranges then. I wasn't talking about something you can't prove 100%. i was talking about something a)you can't even begin to show any evidence whatsoever and b)is in opposition with the very laws of nature.

I know very little about cold fusion and whatever the other was that you said but i suspect that those ideas are based on scientific probabilities?

I don't understand, Brian. On the criteria you list, how is Jehovah different than cold fusion?
ok. i went back and reread our discussion so far and i admit i did not fully understand your point, and i wasn't clearly explaining mine. Again, I know nothing of cold fusion and would be interested in learning more. I asked my co-worker about it and he said he didn't think there was any evidence to support it, but it is still a concept.

I would "go there" with both the concept of god and cold fusion, in terms of faith in it, when there is evidence to support it. Since there is none, yet, I "don't go there". I choose not to put energy into debating things that cannot be properly assessed in regards to it's very existence.


I would ask that if it does exist than does it merit devotion?

I take a look around and I see a planet that is succumbing to global warming, more and more species becoming extinct, war, disease, famine...etc

Frankly, I will not devote myself to anything that causes, or merely allows, all this to happen, whether or not it proves itself to be true.
I don't like the term "freethinker" and have stopped using the term mainly because someone may indeed think freely, but have not encountered enough information or arguments to reject supernaturalism. Even when I believed in supernaturalism, I was a freethinker in that I thought for myself wherever the quest would bring me, and eventually that brought me to atheism.
I think we should all embrace the term 'atheist' instead of using other titles.

The more non-believers who use it, the more the world will be forced to view the term in a different light.

The word has negative connotations. But that does not mean we should have to change it. That means we need to change the way people view it.

In my opinion, using other terms is only hindering this process.
I do not know if someone already posted this (sorry but there are many responses and I havent got that much time XD) but in a name comes a lot of meaning. I recommend everyone out there to study ethymology, in romance languages such as spanish it will prove really useful to understanding the meaning of words.

In the case of both agnosticism and atheism, the -ism denotes that it is a movement of somekind. the a- denotes withouth. gnosis is greek for knowledge, therefore agnosticism is a movement that denotes taht it lacks the sufficient knowledge. Teism.... well I dont need to explain that one.

On track with the conversation kept here, I prefer to say I am a freethinking agnostic, for I am not against religion nor with it, I recognize that the evidence is insufficient.

But on a private track, I would admit my atheism, for I DO believe there are enough proof to at least prove wrong the cristian religions.


I've seen a lot of people who think that freethinker and freethought means "willing to swallow to any New Age nonsense put forth".

The word atheist pretty much clears up any grey areas.


© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service