Is Sam Harris Correct To State That Those Who Do Not Believe In God Have Fallen Into A Trap?

Question

By Allowing Themselves To Be Called Atheists?

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2007/10/the_problem_with_atheism.html

Answer 1

yes I think he makes a good point, but for us to be able to debate and converse withothers on this subject and to be able to find some comfort from the attacks of the religious groups, we need to be able to join together in a worldwide group, thus Atheists or Anti-theists is appropriate, for it is what defines our belief system. in short, we as a group of people or as a movement are Anti-theists, we do not believe in God or religion. look at that statement, the " we do not believe" but to not believe in something is a belief in itself, and that belief is Anti-theist or Atheism, its just a denomination given to describe our religious movement, I for one am proud to be called Atheist and proud to be a member of the logical movement of Anti-theists.

we have only got 260million Americans and 30million British to convert, lets stand together under the banner of Atheist and teach the theist some truth! ha ha lol

Answer 2

He makes a very good point and I can see the utility of not using the term atheist.

However, I don't think there is a trap that atheists fall into, it is a trap that the thinking of believers cannot get out of. It is the believers that categorise people who don't believe as a sub-culture. It is their inability to understand how anybody cannot have a belief system to guide their life that makes them slot people who do not believe into the basket marked atheist.

The term suffragette was probably a pejorative one at one time, but it was not a bad thing in the end. The cause was right and eventually the rest of society saw this.

I don't call myself an atheist often, though sometimes it is easier to not deny it, simply because believers often call atheism a belief system when I don't think it is. Rather it is simply not having the beliefs that they have.

What he is advocating is Stealth Atheism. Doing exactly the same thing, but without flying the Atheist flag. Which is a tactic copied from the other side when Creationism was re-labelled as Intelligent Design. So, yep, let's do it.

Answer 3

No. He raises a good point but I don't think he makes his case.

There is enough predominance of theism in most cultures that "atheism" is going to be a useful term for some time.

There may come a time where the issue is sufficently past that to use "atheist" is to mis-emphasise.

Similarly I look forward to the time when, reporting the Oscars etc. , it's no more likely to have a person's skin colour noted than their eye-colour is now. But we haven't got that far.

Answer 4

Yes and no, I agree that atheism conjures in the mind of the theist all sorts of negative connotations but no matter what guise non belief takes they'd still attach those same connotations.
Before fundamentalism reared its ugly head, I think most atheists were live and let live types and wouldn't have given 2 thoughts for whatever religious people did and wouldn't have thought of themselves as atheists.

Answer 5

He makes an notably solid factor and that i can work out the applying of not utilising the term atheist. however, i don't think of there's a seize that atheists fall into, it incredibly is a seize that the thinking of believers can't get out of. this is the believers that categorise people who don't think as a sub-lifestyle. it incredibly is their lack of ability to appreciate how truthfully each and every person can't have a concept gadget to lead their existence that makes them slot people who don't think into the basket marked atheist. The term suffragette grew to become into probable a pejorative one at one time, yet it grew to become into not a bad component in the top. The reason grew to become into precise and finally something of society observed this. i don't call myself an atheist commonly, however from time to time it incredibly is way less confusing to not deny it, because of the fact believers commonly call atheism a concept gadget whilst i don't think of it incredibly is. particularly it incredibly is in basic terms not having the ideals that they've. What he's advocating is Stealth Atheism. Doing precisely the comparable component, yet without flying the Atheist flag. it fairly is a tactic copied from the different area whilst Creationism grew to become into re-labelled as sensible layout. So, yep, enable's do it.

Answer 6

Yes I agree totally with the great man.

I read this article just the other day.

Just like those who oppose astrology and other mumbo jumbo we should not allow ourselves to fall into the trap of being labelled, we should just purely see ourselves as wielding the mighty sword of truth and reason!

Answer 7

Yes

Answer 8

well, unlike race, being atheist is a choice...i really dont see what problem you have with being called atheist... i mean, its what you guys choose to call yourself.... it sounds to me like he is just another typical atheist who wants something to complain and voice his opinion about.... even when he "overcomes" whatever it is he is griping about, he will just move on to another topic to gripe about...... he will never be satisfied, because of the lack of God in his life. i mean, have you not ever noticed that atheist do the most complaining than any other group or culture?? do ya not think there is a reason for that?

Answer 9

Are those who calls themselves non-drinkers wrongly submitting to an semantic classification?

What they are wrong about about is making a distinction between themselves and religionists, as atheism is indeed a religion, with it's militant brand evangelizing a belief system whose main tenet cannot be proven, and which has a far greater potential for evil than other false religions, as it lacks a transcendent authoritative codified code of morals, and instead it operates out of an objectively baseless morality, and can only assure us it will do what is "reasonable" (like making Hitler a Christian). However, as much as they seek to deny it, it was such an objectively baseless atheistic morality that Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and classic Communism operated out of in supressing and slaying their millions, doing what was "reasonable to them! (thus i am not surprised many atheists today speak of removing children from Christian/creationist homes, which would only be the beginning).

Far from "political religion" being to blame, it is atheism that is conductive to such, and to effective worship of self or other men, such as we seen in N. Korea today.

As for me and my house, we will serve the one who transformed my life, who served other's selflessly and sinlessly, and then gave Himself for us and rose again, And whose reality is uniquely proven in the hearts and lives of multitudes who have trusted and obeyed him now and in times past. To God be the glory.

Answer 10

yes, i do think sam is right about this...thanks for the link.