Sam Harris once made a speech about the community title of "atheists" and how we (speaking for fellow "atheists") are fools for accepting the label. While I hesitate to let go of the prestige, I agree with him. To paraphrase, we are allowing ourselves to be grouped into an opposing viewpoint and thus be marginalized. Polls state that atheists are among the least trusted demographic within the US and by identifying ourselves as atheists, we are allowing people to lump us in with all of the misconceptions about us. Now, abandoning the title of "atheist" does nothing to change the fact that, yes, we are atheists, but it opens up the door for much easier progress. Harris states, simply, that there are bigger fish to fry than simply proving people wrong about god. By switching agendas, from godlessness to simply reason, we become much more accessible. The focus switches from claiming something doesn't exist, to fighting for a positive cause. Reason. This is a concept that few people would stand against.
A friend's words to me now make sense. When he said that he didn't like the idea of a group of people who stood against something, rather than for something, I was quick to correct him. In my eyes, the word "atheist" has grown to mean a lot more than just "doesn't believe in gods." Rather, the community that has developed around atheism has become more of a pro-truth, pro-science, pro-reason, pro-logic group. Though the word "atheist" within the dictionary implies none of that, from a logical standpoint, the congregation of people simply based off of their lack of belief seems kind of silly outside the context of a support group. Do I seem like the kind of person who needs support? Obviously, from an outsider's perspective, we are none of those things. We are simply against. We are here to rain on parades. Though it is not true, we consent to the definition when we apply the label to ourselves.
So here comes the realization that we need better PR. Atheism may be the logical conclusion to the application of our principles, but there is a journey that must take place before we reach our destination. We have always been advocates of using reason to solve problems and answer questions, but fighting under the banner of reason is quite different. There are not many groups out there who would outright deny reason as the best course of action. In fact, we might find ourselves with unlikely allies when we apply the idea of reason instead of atheism. Moderately religious or spiritual people would more easily fight along side a movement for reason than they would a movement for atheism. Additionally, the decidedly positive spin on the issue would earn more sympathy than the "grumpy atheist" personification does. When we fight for reason, we put ourselves on the right side of any argument.
With this, I would like to rededicate my blog to a few simple principles. The first of which is reason. I am on a mission to destroy arguments that fail the test of reality. I hope to find myself on the correct side, obviously, but I have a different way of determining I am correct. Some people think they are right because they meet some condition (eg. they are important for some reason), however the more reasonable way to determine correctness is to observe the benefits and detriments of the policies you uphold. In other words, you can't be correct before you know the answer. The next principle to which I dedicate my blog is evidence. This is the basis of all reason, the existence of fact, the only path to truth. Though evidence can lead one astray at times, it is not the evidence's fault for doing so - only our overeager minds in their drive to make sense of the world. Evidence is all that we have and it must not be ignored. Finally, I dedicate my blog to liberty. There is no question in my mind that freedom is the single most important aspect of human society. Though there are many questions that could cast doubt on the importance of freedom (One that comes to mind is that of finding a solution to overpopulation), I am dedicated to the search of solutions with freedom in mind before a single obstruction is ever considered.
The battle continues, but for me, it has a new name. We've always been fighting for reason; from getting the government to enforce the first amendment by removing references to god, to the defeat of crazy ideas like Intelligent Design. But it's always been too easy for people to dismiss us because they see us as flighty snipers of their freedoms. Now we have a retort. "So, you're saying you don't agree with a reasonable proposition?" Preposterous.
2 nibbles: