I've started reading Fighting God: An Atheist Manifesto & find myself in disagreement. I'm not at all sure IDing as 'atheist' is important.
-
-
I used 'atheist' a lot when the non-existence of God was the most important thing to me. That hasn't been the case for some time.
-
If I start talking abt Jacques Lacan, I know that some of you will be horrified & disown me but one idea of his is very useful.
-
The 'master-signifier' - an important, much-used word beneath which is a lot more meaning relating to what a person is all about.
-
When I used 'atheist' a lot, I was all abt God & non-existence of God. Fair enough coz my belief in & fear of him had dominated for so long
-
But you can only be interested in a non-existent god for so long. God itself is seldom the focus for atheist critics of religion.
-
We're usually much more concerned abt how ppl claim to know things & the ethical values of religion & its impact on the world we share.
-
Therefore 'sceptic' and 'humanist' are much more informative 'master-signifiers' for many of us than 'atheist.' That's a good thing.
-
Often ppl associate scepticism & humanism & liberalism & science-advocacy with atheism but that's not necessarily so & has its own dangers.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.