Hi Margaret, Ian,
>I've been thinking this over for a few days to >decide how to best answer and because I share >commonality in my beliefs with what Marsha just >posted about why she is is an athiest and >with what Sam Harris wrote - which seems to imply >not being an athiest - If you follow the link and read the rest of the speech (the part I excerpted was the end) called "The Problem With Atheism," Sam Harris gives his reasons why he thinks we (meaning people who do not believe in gods) should not call ourselves atheists (though he is considered on of "The New Athiests.") This speech was very contraversial in the atheist world. It is interesting reading. You can also watch the speech here http://www.samharris.org/site/media_video/ >How do you define 'atheism'? If you or a group's >definition has already been posted - sorry to >have missed it. An atheist is someone who has considered the dogmatic claims of religion but is unconvinced. Harris says we shouldn't need a word for such a person since this is not a philosophical position. There are an uncountable number of things that we don't believe, but we don't label ourselves as unbelievers with regard to those things. He only grudgingly accepts the labelling. > >I think it's funny that science has become an 'ism'. Scientism is the self-defeating philosphical position that only claims that are verifiable through scientific means are true. (This position is not verifiable through scientific means.) Harris does not subscribe to this philosophy. Regards, Steve Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
