Predictably, Neil deGrasse Tyson's thoughts on the "atheist" label drew some mixed reviews. The criticism which, in my estimation, deserves the most attention is the argument that we do nothing to overcome the stigma attached to the "atheist" label by shunning or avoiding it. I think this is a point worth considering. I don't know whether NDT is uncomfortable with the label because of the negative baggage folks put on it; either way, I know many people who don't believe in god(s) - which, by definition, makes them atheists - who refuse to call themselves atheists because the word atheist is looked at as an evil word by so many ignorant people.
There are other people who avoid the "atheist" label because they are uncomfortable being associated with the social group known as atheists. Clearly, NDT fits into this category (regardless of whether he belongs in the former category also). I find myself in this category as well (as I explained in the previous entry), not because I don't trust people who call themselves atheists, but because I don't trust groups organized under the banner of atheism. Don't get me wrong: I enjoy the fact that those of us who share similar passions, values and vision can commune together as freethinkers and truth seekers. I would just prefer to unite under positive ideologies rather than find unity in nothing more than what we are not. And since I'm not saying anything I haven't said already, I may as well continue to quote myself further:
Some atheists want to be more unified, and I understand an important reason behind that desire is to be well-represented in our society. We still live in a country in which admitting agnosticism or atheism is political suicide. Non-theists need a voice in the public square; however, the danger is that one day "atheist" will be spelled with a capital A and then Atheists will risk falling into dogmatism and a herd mentality, which is what they wanted to avoid in the first place. I don't trust anything that a person has to be "converted to" in order to accept.
This is certainly a reflection of why I prefer the labels "skeptic" and "freethinker" over "atheist" to describe myself, but if atheists want to unite, they should unite under the banner of logic, science, the desire to gain knowledge and form beliefs on the basis of reason, independent of authority or tradition, and the willingness to change one's views in light of the best evidence available currently. Fortunately, many atheists are united for such purposes, which is why I feel more at home in the atheist culture than anywhere else. [source]
NDT is correct: it's odd that the word "atheist" exists. The word is a negative, a description of what one is not, like "non-skier" or "non-golfer." Odd though it may be, the word exists because it was forced on us. As Wikipedia explains: "The term atheism originated from the Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god", used as a pejorative term applied to those thought to reject the gods worshipped by the larger society. With the spread of freethought, skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in criticism of religion, application of the term narrowed in scope." If society began to shun, judge, or condemn everyone who didn't golf, then "non-golfer" would likely become as common a term as "atheist."
Neil deGrasse Tyson isn't the only one who finds the word "atheist" curious. Sam Harris - who quite obviously embraces the "atheist" label - wrote: In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs. We note the irony of the existence of a word that describes a thing that isn't a thing and an "ism" that isn't an "ism" at all when we playfully employ new descriptive terms like A-Unicornist and NonStampCollector.
So what's the answer? How do we remove the stigma? I'm not sure we can. Every label has baggage attached to it. The best we can do is continue to educate, which is precisely what NDT is all about. Say what you must about Neil deGrasse Tyson, but, regardless of what label he chooses for himself, he has done more to defend and uphold the same positive values and ideals held by many atheists than most of those atheists will ever do in a lifetime.
— Dead-Logic
The Atheist Label (part two)
The Atheist Label (part two)
Posted by , Published at 7:13 AM and have
