Difference between revisions of "Atheism"
(→Opinion: language of god/ignorance) |
(→Opinion: harris: the myth of secular moral chaos) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
* '''2006-11-16''' [http://www.jewcy.com/dialogue/monday_why_are_atheists_so_angry_sam_harris Why Are Atheists So Angry?]: this is actually the first part of a well-written multi-round dialogue between atheist [[Sam Harris]] and believer Dennis Prager. Unfortunately, Prager's responses seem to be mostly diversionary, including an [[ad hominem]] attack on {{wpbackup|Bertrand Russell}} which does nothing to answer Harris's posing of Russell's {{wpbackup|celestial teapot}} analogy. He does seem to get more real about the dialogue towards the end, however. | * '''2006-11-16''' [http://www.jewcy.com/dialogue/monday_why_are_atheists_so_angry_sam_harris Why Are Atheists So Angry?]: this is actually the first part of a well-written multi-round dialogue between atheist [[Sam Harris]] and believer Dennis Prager. Unfortunately, Prager's responses seem to be mostly diversionary, including an [[ad hominem]] attack on {{wpbackup|Bertrand Russell}} which does nothing to answer Harris's posing of Russell's {{wpbackup|celestial teapot}} analogy. He does seem to get more real about the dialogue towards the end, however. | ||
* '''2006-08-15''' [http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060815_sam_harris_language_ignorance/ The Language of Ignorance] by [[Sam Harris]]: answers the [[religious]] arguments in Human Genome Project head [[Francis Collins]]'s book ''The Language of God'' | * '''2006-08-15''' [http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060815_sam_harris_language_ignorance/ The Language of Ignorance] by [[Sam Harris]]: answers the [[religious]] arguments in Human Genome Project head [[Francis Collins]]'s book ''The Language of God'' | ||
| + | * [http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=sharris_26_3 The Myth of Secular Moral Chaos] by [[Sam Harris]] | ||
==Related Articles== | ==Related Articles== | ||
Revision as of 16:00, 13 January 2007
Overview
Atheism is the belief that there is no such thing as a deity (or deities); it is the opposite of theism. Some definitions of atheism allow for the possibilities that an atheist simply has no opinion on the existence of deities, or believes the existence of deities to be something humans cannot know, but these latter usages are more often called agnosticism.
For the purposes of discussion within Issuepedia, our working definition will be that atheism is the belief that the existence of any being generally matching God's description is at best unlikely, and that there is no evidence that belief in such a being is in any way necessary. This definition encompasses both atheism and agnosticism.
Arguments and Opinions
Theists often ask atheists to defend their non-belief, which is silly; people are not normally required to explain their disbelief in things which cannot be proven either way. The only necessary response to "Why don't you believe in God?" is "Why should I?".
There are, however, some good reasons not to depend on God as an explanation for natural phenomena, whether or not God actually exists.
Links
Reference
Groups
Facts
- 2006-12-24 10 myths - and 10 Truths - About Atheism by Sam Harris
Opinion
- 2006-11-16 Why Are Atheists So Angry?: this is actually the first part of a well-written multi-round dialogue between atheist Sam Harris and believer Dennis Prager. Unfortunately, Prager's responses seem to be mostly diversionary, including an ad hominem attack on Bertrand Russell [W] which does nothing to answer Harris's posing of Russell's celestial teapot [W] analogy. He does seem to get more real about the dialogue towards the end, however.
- 2006-08-15 The Language of Ignorance by Sam Harris: answers the religious arguments in Human Genome Project head Francis Collins's book The Language of God
- The Myth of Secular Moral Chaos by Sam Harris
Related Articles
- Most religion supposes the existence of one or more gods (theism), and hence is diametrically opposed to atheism.
- Atheism and religion often come into conflict, for obvious reasons.