Atheists, Do We Care About Our Image?

viole · Mar 21, 2016

GodlessHeathen said:
Atheists are not a well-liked group around the world, barring a few countries. For example, in Brazil:

In much of the Middle East and North Africa, simply being an atheist is punishable by death. But even in countries you would think are a bit more progressive than Saudi Arabia, nearly a fifth of Brazilians HATE atheists and another quarter feel some sort of dislike towards them. In the United States:

Almost HALF of American parents would hate it if their child married an atheist. Even in a country that is gripped by Islamophobia and still suffering racial strife with African-Americans, discrimination against atheists blows all other minorities out of the water. Again, in the United States:

We all know how well-liked Muslims and gays are in American society, but again discrimination against atheists is blown out of the water. And perhaps what we "suffer" is less visible because atheism is an ideology and you can't readily identify an atheist by looking at him or her. Unless, they're one of those people who put a Darwin fish on their minivan or wear those shirts with the "A" on it. I could go on listing more and more polls, but they all show the same thing in most of the world. The numbers aren't pretty.

The cause of this resentment towards us, whether it is simply religious intolerance towards us or if our negative image is (at least in part) self-inflicted, doesn't really matter. We do know that it has real-world consequences. Atheists are being executed in North Africa, the Middle East, and Southern Asia. In Russia, there are cases of atheists being committed to mental institutions for simply being atheist. And even in North America where atheists comprise a significant minority of the population (usually 25-30%), we are seeing numbers like half of entire societies hating atheists or not wanting them to marry into the family or just hating them for what they DON'T believe. I should know. I'm dating a girl whose family doesn't approve of our relationship simply because of my lack of belief.

The point of all this isn't to cry "Woe is me!" and make myself to be part of a victim class. Atheists, despite being by far the most reviled group in almost every society across the globe, have the "advantage" of being able to blend into most segments of society. So the question is, should we care about our global image? If so, what can we do as individuals or as a group to improve that image?

To answer my own question, I do think we should care about our image because this negative image has dire consequences (especially when the numbers are this bad almost uniformly across the globe). Atheists are being executed in some parts of the world. And while in the West that might not be the case, it's still the case that atheists are being discriminated against more than any other group. "Atheist" is a dirty word. Atheism by its very nature is the negative rejection of a positive claim. While it is not an institution, it is perceived as one that's causing active harm to society. And certain forms of atheism (such as strident anti-theism) can have the opposite effective of winning hearts and minds. Calling someone an idiot will not convince them you are correct, nor will it endear them to you.

I'm not advocating for a tolerance of bad ideas nor for relaxing the fight for secularism or anything of the sort. What I am advocating for is a sort of charm offensive. An offensive pro-atheism billboard in a bus isn't going to convince anyone. It will at best preach to the choir and at worst confirm people's worst suspicions of atheists. Recently I watched "God is Not Dead" with my Christian girlfriend. The depiction of atheists was so over the top anti-theistic that even in the deepest, darkest atheist forums I have been on the Internet, never have I ever encountered anything so stridently anti-theistic. But this is their honest perception of us. They seem to regard us as their enemy when really all our position says is "We think you're wrong...".

What are your thoughts?

Well, when you say: we think you are wrong.....about spending eternity with your dear ones, for instance, they might hate you even if you are a very polite and gentle person. That is why I think we would lose our time by being gentle and kind towards strange beliefs. They should be treated as epistemological malfunctions, even when held by very intelligent people.

Once I saw a show about people being able to talk with the departed one. When a gentle and civilized skeptic showed objectively the tricks of the media (plural of medium, I guess), he was the bad hope-killing guy that everybody in the audience hated. People prefer to live with their unsubstantiated hopes, rather than being enlightned by reason.

And the more they suspect you might be right, the more they will hate you.

Ciao

- viole

Sunstone · Mar 21, 2016

It is regrettable that, almost since the beginning of recorded history, atheists have been the boogeymen of the clergy. I don't think, even today, many people grasp that listening to their religious leader describe atheists is about as valuable as listening to a used Toyota salesmen describe Fords. That is, people don't understand what the clergy understands: That atheists and atheism are the competition. If everyone became an atheist, the clergy would starve. And since they have a vested interest in reviling atheists, I do not see the clergy coming around in large numbers to the position that atheists are ok. But so long as the clergy remains opposed to us, many of them will revile us, and most of their congregations will follow suite. For that, and other reasons, I do not think becoming "nicer, kinder, less offensive" atheists is likely to do much to lessen the animosity of the clergy, nor most of their followers.

Perhaps we should instead take a lessen from the LGBT community and oppose the bigotry towards us -- not by becoming nicer, kinder, less offensive (the LGBT community never campaigned on that premise) -- but by loudly and constantly pointing out the absurdity, unfairness, and injustice of the bigotry.

Laika · Mar 21, 2016

I'm more than happy to associate with "anti-theists" like De Sade, Nietzsche and Stalin. I think most religious people worthy of their beliefs would too. As ultimately, religion is about our humanity. We can't escape the fact that among our numbers are some of the cruelest and most brutual represenatives of our species- but neither can theists. In the end, we share the same problem of coming to terms with the reality that man is a fallen being, and we lack those qualitities of divinity which we nevertheless aspire towards in perfection and knowledge of good and evil only underlines how far we are from attaining our ideals. The pursuit of perfection necessarily leads to reducing our ideals to absurity; De Sade's libertinism ultimately became a violation of other's liberties; Nietzsche's struggles with Nihlism may well- if you are of the poetic inclination- have driven him insane; And Stalin's pursuit of the "freedom" to exercise limitless power on earth and to achieve the self-deficiation of man led to the destruction and oppression of a great many members of the human race.

I'd rather be among the theives, the tax collectors and the prostitutes and Jesus would too. I'm a better atheist for accepting the "sinful" and "fallen" nature of my humanity and that would make me a better Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist or Hindu. If being put on the cross for the love of humanity and the sinners is the price to be paid- so be it. All that the people gain by doing so is the illusion of their pride, the futile egotism of their presumed self-importance in the great cosmic insginifiance, and the ability to continue to live as hypocrites asserting moral absolutes and worshiping the unattainable perfection of divinity and punishing humanity for simply being "human, all too human". Why would I want to compromise with such people when they are too ashamed of their humanity to be sincere in their beliefs in divinity?

lewisnotmiller · Mar 21, 2016

Sunstone said:
I have several thoughts about whether we should care about our image, but I don't have the time this morning to share them. I've got a Bible burning at 10:00, and a baby sacrifice and BBQ at noon.

Phhht...you have poor time management skills, is your problem.
Cancel your 10.00, and simply use the Bibles as kindling for the baby BBQ at midday.

For goodness sake man, get organised. And wear some pants!

lewisnotmiller · Mar 21, 2016

9-10ths_Penguin said:
Just the word "atheists" by itself is viewed as intentionally inflammatory:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...ost-inoffensive-atheist-bus-ad-ever-rejected/

I'll follow my own ethics when deciding how to act, and that includes not being a jerk to people without good reason.

... but since that story broke in 2012, I've realized the folly of guiding myself by trying to be inoffensive to people who consider even the idea of atheism to be offensive. If they're annoyed, too bad. My objective at this stage is to neutralize their power to take their frustrations out against atheists, not to win them over.

Edit: it's impossible to advocate for secularism without being seen as intentionally inflammatory to a large group of people.

All makes sense, mate, and I agree. I'm very open in terms of my atheism, which generally seems to surprise people, even in a very religiously apathetic country like Australia. I guess I'm not angry or science-y enough to fit stereotypes, and a lot of people in Australia are basically agnostic, or culturally Christian. But it is generally a conversation starter rather than killer, so...

One thing I have expressed here before, and continue to feel is a little frustration with the way some atheists/atheist organisations act. This isn't in a moral sense...they can do whatever they like...but more that I find some of their strategies counterproductive. If there were some magical union of atheists, and I had complete dictatorial powers over the marketing campaign, I'd be focusing strongly on secularism. This isn't for branding reasons, but more because I think finding common ground with moderates who happen to be religious makes a lot of sense. I have no interest in 'establishing atheism', but I have a very strong interest in making society equitable politically.

Suggestions like rebranding atheism as 'Brights' is, frankly, offensive to me. Atheism is just atheism, and atheists making more of it than that is just as misguided as theists doing it (if a lot less dangerous in the short term).

skl · Mar 21, 2016

GodlessHeathen said:
Atheists are not a well-liked group around the world, barring a few countries. For example, in Brazil:

In much of the Middle East and North Africa, simply being an atheist is punishable by death. But even in countries you would think are a bit more progressive than Saudi Arabia, nearly a fifth of Brazilians HATE atheists and another quarter feel some sort of dislike towards them. In the United States:

Almost HALF of American parents would hate it if their child married an atheist. Even in a country that is gripped by Islamophobia and still suffering racial strife with African-Americans, discrimination against atheists blows all other minorities out of the water. Again, in the United States:

We all know how well-liked Muslims and gays are in American society, but again discrimination against atheists is blown out of the water. And perhaps what we "suffer" is less visible because atheism is an ideology and you can't readily identify an atheist by looking at him or her. Unless, they're one of those people who put a Darwin fish on their minivan or wear those shirts with the "A" on it. I could go on listing more and more polls, but they all show the same thing in most of the world. The numbers aren't pretty.

The cause of this resentment towards us, whether it is simply religious intolerance towards us or if our negative image is (at least in part) self-inflicted, doesn't really matter. We do know that it has real-world consequences. Atheists are being executed in North Africa, the Middle East, and Southern Asia. In Russia, there are cases of atheists being committed to mental institutions for simply being atheist. And even in North America where atheists comprise a significant minority of the population (usually 25-30%), we are seeing numbers like half of entire societies hating atheists or not wanting them to marry into the family or just hating them for what they DON'T believe. I should know. I'm dating a girl whose family doesn't approve of our relationship simply because of my lack of belief.

The point of all this isn't to cry "Woe is me!" and make myself to be part of a victim class. Atheists, despite being by far the most reviled group in almost every society across the globe, have the "advantage" of being able to blend into most segments of society. So the question is, should we care about our global image? If so, what can we do as individuals or as a group to improve that image?

To answer my own question, I do think we should care about our image because this negative image has dire consequences (especially when the numbers are this bad almost uniformly across the globe). Atheists are being executed in some parts of the world. And while in the West that might not be the case, it's still the case that atheists are being discriminated against more than any other group. "Atheist" is a dirty word. Atheism by its very nature is the negative rejection of a positive claim. While it is not an institution, it is perceived as one that's causing active harm to society. And certain forms of atheism (such as strident anti-theism) can have the opposite effective of winning hearts and minds. Calling someone an idiot will not convince them you are correct, nor will it endear them to you.

I'm not advocating for a tolerance of bad ideas nor for relaxing the fight for secularism or anything of the sort. What I am advocating for is a sort of charm offensive. An offensive pro-atheism billboard in a bus isn't going to convince anyone. It will at best preach to the choir and at worst confirm people's worst suspicions of atheists. Recently I watched "God is Not Dead" with my Christian girlfriend. The depiction of atheists was so over the top anti-theistic that even in the deepest, darkest atheist forums I have been on the Internet, never have I ever encountered anything so stridently anti-theistic. But this is their honest perception of us. They seem to regard us as their enemy when really all our position says is "We think you're wrong...".

What are your thoughts?

GodlessHeathen said:
because atheism is an ideology

I am sure that atheism is not an ideology. I am also sure some would disagree, but if you take it at the most purist form such as the fact that atheism is the default position because this is how you are born and spend your baby years, and longer if you are lucky enough to not be born to parents set on religious indoctrination.

Because you are not aware of religion with no system of ideas and ideals and are only aware of Mum and Dad, the babysitter, carer, food, sleep and nappies does this make you just an ignoramus during these years?

Many atheists like myself make it a personal ideology, however many could not give a toss either way and ignore religion, science, aliens and Batman also having no system of ideas and ideals.

icehorse · Mar 21, 2016

I also don't think it's correct to call atheism an ideology.

But to the point, my orientation is to promote secularism and critical thinking, and to just not bring up atheism unless asked.

GodlessHeathen · Mar 22, 2016

While my language there was a bit slippery, I think people are missing the broader point I was making for the sake of pedantry. When compared to marginalized minority groups such as African-Americans (who are easily identified by skin colour) or Muslims (who are normally stereotyped as being Arabic, but have other identifiers such as religious symbols and dress), atheism is a philosophical position on the existence of God, and you cannot readily identify people by their philosophical position. You cannot readily tell if someone is pro-choice or pro-life just by looking at them, you can't tell who is an atheist or agnostic or theist just by looking at them, you can't tell who is a capitalist or Communist just by looking at them. These are ideologies and philosophical positions. Since it is harder to readily identify the people who hold them, it acts as a shield against discrimination in some ways. At least against the same type of discrimination that African-Americans or Muslim-Americans may face just by simply walking down the street. That was the point I was making.

GodlessHeathen · Mar 22, 2016

viole said:
Well, when you say: we think you are wrong.....about spending eternity with your dear ones, for instance, they might hate you even if you are a very polite and gentle person. That is why I think we would lose our time by being gentle and kind towards strange beliefs. They should be treated as epistemological malfunctions, even when held by very intelligent people.

Once I saw a show about people being able to talk with the departed one. When a gentle and civilized skeptic showed objectively the tricks of the media (plural of medium, I guess), he was the bad hope-killing guy that everybody in the audience hated. People prefer to live with their unsubstantiated hopes, rather than being enlightned by reason.

And the more they suspect you might be right, the more they will hate you.

Ciao
- viole

Absolutely. I tried to make this clear in the OP. There are some who will hate us regardless of how we act or what we do or say. But just because these people exist doesn't mean we cannot build some bridges and find some common ground (on other things) with the theists who are less obstructionist. I'm able to get along with plenty of Christians personally as friends, but we still can disagree on the point of the existence of God. We can challenge each other respectfully, without insulting each others' intelligence, without assuming the other is illogical and irrational. We can ask questions and get honest, direct answers in a non-adversarial way. Fighting bad ideas by insulting those who hold them will not convince people. If you're shouting and screaming and calling the other person a moron, they're less likely to listen to your point of view and more likely to associate all atheists with how you've acted (just as we do with theists).

That's why I don't really consider this "tone policing" as some others have suggested, but as a superior strategy to a) convince people that atheism is a better philosophical position and b) to reduce the discrimination we face globally, bit by bit. By demonstrating to religious people how secularism protects their religious freedoms too, we can get more secular theists on our side and enact important changes in more theocratic societies. Where we ARE unfairly discriminated against, I'm not suggesting we calmly take it with a smile. But nor do we have to fight every engagement with denigration and derision, especially against those who potentially could be sympathetic to our worldview even if they don't agree with it.

Revoltingest · Mar 22, 2016

GodlessHeathen said:
While my language there was a bit slippery, I think people are missing the broader point I was making for the sake of pedantry.

Since many believers really do think there is an atheist agenda (evil, of course),
objecting to its being called an "ideology" is far from the province of pedants.

"Tone police"......I'd never heard of this term until recently (at RF).
I observe that it's often wielded by hostile people who seek to justify abusing others,
sometimes in violation of the rules....but it's OK because it's "the truth". In their minds.
It's right because it fights wrongs. But in the minds of outside observers, it earns scorn.
We should feel free to express ourselves.....but it pays to consider our effect.
Do we want to increase respect for our perspective, or exacerbate a bad image?

skl · Mar 22, 2016

GodlessHeathen said:
While my language there was a bit slippery, I think people are missing the broader point I was making for the sake of pedantry. When compared to marginalized minority groups such as African-Americans (who are easily identified by skin colour) or Muslims (who are normally stereotyped as being Arabic, but have other identifiers such as religious symbols and dress), atheism is a philosophical position on the existence of God, and you cannot readily identify people by their philosophical position. You cannot readily tell if someone is pro-choice or pro-life just by looking at them, you can't tell who is an atheist or agnostic or theist just by looking at them, you can't tell who is a capitalist or Communist just by looking at them. These are ideologies and philosophical positions. Since it is harder to readily identify the people who hold them, it acts as a shield against discrimination in some ways. At least against the same type of discrimination that African-Americans or Muslim-Americans may face just by simply walking down the street. That was the point I was making.

I do get your point and I agree with most of what you say. I have emphasised the atheist definition with you due to some debate I have had in the past about this issue with a Christian who I assume along with others happen to actually believe and suggested in so many words that you are born with the desire to seek God. I can see why some atheists do "drop the ball" so to speak when debating with often the minority of religious groups when they come out with stuff such as this.

You will always get the radicle types who want to inject venom and abuse nto the debate, however on basic terms atheists are less aggressive or abusive than any others pursuing their ideologies and this includes politicians. Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and their colleagues are the evidence we have that atheists have the best evidence to support their views and can win the arguments over the best apologetics any religion can throw at them without being abusive.

I do not simply look at this issue as winning a debate, I see it as just sowing the seed of doubt within the indoctrinated mind of these people and with a bit of luck something will spark in their subconsciousness enabling them to free their own minds. Unfortunately, and sadly many will never be able to have freedom of thought within their ideology.

Desert Snake · Mar 22, 2016

Atheism is a faith?

Demonslayer · Mar 22, 2016

q konn said:
Atheism is a faith?

Nope

Demonslayer · Mar 22, 2016

Mohammad Nur Syamsu said:
It is very obviously because atheists scoff and ridicule's people's religion.

Don't you think that's a bit of a generalization? Why not say all Muslims bomb airplanes?

Mohammad Nur Syamsu · Mar 22, 2016

GodlessHeathen said:
atheism is a philosophical position on the existence of God, and you cannot readily identify people by their philosophical position.

I can do it. I once guessed outright someone I was chatting with was an atheist, while we were chatting about completely different things, I was correct.

You just have to watch for that particular sort of calculating going on in the background of the way the atheist behaves. Calculating for their own benefit. Now everybody will behave in a calculated way, but an atheist will do it with conviction, as like that it is the right way to behave. While other people have spontaneous expression of emotion from the heart as the right way to behave, and they only calculate because it's convenient.

Mohammad Nur Syamsu · Mar 22, 2016

Demonslayer said:
Don't you think that's a bit of a generalization? Why not say all Muslims bomb airplanes?

If the same percentage of muslims bomb airplanes as the percentage of atheists which scoff religion, then we would not have airplanes. This percentage is the vast majority of atheists.

Altfish · Mar 22, 2016

Mohammad Nur Syamsu said:
I can do it. I once guessed outright someone I was chatting with was an atheist, while we were chatting about completely different things, I was correct.

You just have to watch for that particular sort of calculating going on in the background of the way the atheist behaves. Calculating for their own benefit. Now everybody will behave in a calculated way, but an atheist will do it with conviction, as like that it is the right way to behave. While other people have spontaneous expression of emotion from the heart as the right way to behave, and they only calculate because it's convenient.

I can often do that with teachers, sometimes, I think it is the red pens. Can you elaborate on what I do that is calculating, I've not spotted that in myself?
Atheists do not normally dress in a particularly atheist way, like religious people often do. We do not go round knocking on doors 'spreading the word'. So what is we do?
You have met some strange atheists.

Altfish · Mar 22, 2016

Mohammad Nur Syamsu said:
If the same percentage of muslims bomb airplanes as the percentage of atheists which scoff religion, then we would not have airplanes. This percentage is the vast majority of atheists.

What do you mean by "...scoff religion."?
If someone asks me my opinion on religion I will not say, "Oh, it's great, there should be more of it". I usually say something like, "I don't mind religion so long as the faithful are not trying to make me comply with their strange beliefs." Is that 'scoffing'?

Revoltingest · Mar 22, 2016

Mohammad Nur Syamsu said:
If the same percentage of muslims bomb airplanes as the percentage of atheists which scoff religion, then we would not have airplanes. This percentage is the vast majority of atheists.

Mohammad Nur Syamsu said:
I can do it. I once guessed outright someone I was chatting with was an atheist, while we were chatting about completely different things, I was correct.
You just have to watch for that particular sort of calculating going on in the background of the way the atheist behaves. Calculating for their own benefit. Now everybody will behave in a calculated way, but an atheist will do it with conviction, as like that it is the right way to behave. While other people have spontaneous expression of emotion from the heart as the right way to behave, and they only calculate because it's convenient.

You're posting in this forum which (by the OP's title) would be limited to atheists.
Yet your posts indicate prejudice towards us, & a lack of understanding.
A personal question....
Do you now identify as an atheist?

`mud · Mar 22, 2016

There seems to be something self serving about the OP,
or some of the authors here.
A lot of crap follows behind these horses, doesn't it ?
~
'mud

Atheists, Do We Care About Our Image?

Ontological Naturalist

De Diablo Del Fora

Well-Known Member

Grand Hat

Grand Hat

A man on a mission

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist

Member

Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

A man on a mission

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

Just old