Austin Cline at atheism.about.com wrote two articles titled: You Might Be an Uncle Tom Atheist If… and Avoiding Uncle Tom Atheism.
I was going to provide my take on these articles but others have already beaten me to it. VJack at Atheist Revolution asks Who’s a Real Atheist? and is already creating some interesting debate.
Personally I think Austin has some good points, even if some of his terminology and analogies are a bit off the mark.
4 December 2008 at 11:51 am
Regarding the schools funding debate, we can avoid Uncle Tom Atheism by recognising that there is as little justification for funding schools that discriminate on the basis of religious affiliation as there is for funding schools that discriminate on the basis of race.
4 December 2008 at 11:55 am
I think that it was a badly constructed piece, antongonistic. Maybe that was his intention?
4 December 2008 at 2:07 pm
I think it was. And why not?
5 December 2008 at 8:51 pm
Why not set up atheist schools? Since they would be strictly rational (altho’ also very emotional) they wd deliver a better education and many parents wd send their little darlin’s there. It must be admitted that education in communist countries is prob. better than in Western countries of equivalent (fairly low) wealth. Cuba is very proud of its medical schools.
10.50 a.m Her Maj’s Time.
8 December 2008 at 2:44 am
Why not set up atheist schools?
Nobody–least of all, atheists–is demanding them. Secular schools, the purpose of which is education rather than religious indoctrination, and where science as opposed to the Book of Genesis is what gets taught in the science classroom, are on the other hand devoutly to be wished.
While Waziristan is probably very proud of its madrassahs, faith schools are not really conducive to the development of individuals who are able to make the fullest use of their cognitive faculties and who are able to function effectively in a liberal democracy.
10 December 2008 at 7:58 pm
Science and Religion
Science is different from religion. It does not pretend that it knows everything. There are even now deep questions about the origins of the universe that we don’t have answers to now though it is possible we may be able to answer some of them in the future.
But the inability of science to provide answers to these questions does not prove that religious faith, tradition, or an ancient holy text has the ability to answer them. Science cannot prove that God does not exist, but this in no way establishes that God exists. There are millions of things whose lack of existence cannot be established.
The philosopher Bertrand Russel had an analogy. Imagine that there is a teapot in orbit around the sun. It is impossible to prove that the teapot does not exist because it is too small to be detected by our telescopes. Nobody but a crazy person would say “Well, I’m prepared to believe in the teapot because I cannot establish that it doesn’t exist.” This means that maybe we have to be technically agnostics, but really we are all atheists about teapots with orbits around the sun.
But now let us suppose that everybody in our society including our teachers and the sages of our tribes all had faith in a teapot that orbits the sun. Let us also suppose that stories of the teapot have come down to us for many generations as one of the traditions of our own society and there are ancient holy texts about the teapot. In this case people would say that a person who did not believe in the teapot is eccentric or mad.
There are infinite numbers of things like celestial teapots whose lack of existence we are unable to establish. There are fairies, for example, and there are unicorns and goblins. We cannot prove that any of these creatures of the imagination do not exist in reality. But we don’t believe they exist, just as we don’t believe that the gods of the Scandinavians, for example, have any true existence.
We are all atheists about almost all of the gods created by societies in the past. Some of us, however, take the ultimate step of believing that the god of the Jews and the Christians, like the gods of the Greeks and the Egyptians, also does not exist.
—
Now here’s a version of this text in Interlingua. (For more information about Interlingua, use a search enging to search on the title “Interlingua in interlingua” or go to http://www.interlingua.com.
Le scientia es differente del religion. Illo non pretende que illo sape toto. Il ha etiam nunc questiones profunde sur le origines del universe al quales nos nunc non ha responsas ben que il es possible que nos potera responder a alicunes de illos in le futuro.
Ma le incapacitate del scientia de provider responsas a iste questiones non proba que le fide religiose, le tradition, o un texto sancte e ancian pote responder a illos. Le scientia non pote probar que Deo non existe, ma isto non establi de ulle maniera que Deo existe. Il ha milliones de cosas cuje existentia non pote esser establite.
Le philosopho Bertrand Russell habeva un analogia. Imagina que il ha un theiera in orbita circum le sol. Il es impossibile probar que le theiera non existe proque illo es troppo parve pro esser detegite per nostre telescopios. Nemo excepte un folle dicerea, “Multo ben, io es preparate a creder in le theiera proque io non pote establir que illo non existe.” Isto significa que forsan nos debe esser technicamente agnosticos, ma vermente nos es omnes atheistas sur theieras con orbitas circum le sol.
Ma que nos nunc suppone que omnes in nostre societate includente nostre professores e le sagios de nostre tribos habeva fide in un theiera que orbita le sol. Que nos anque suppone que historias del theiera ha venite usque nos trans multe generationes como un del traditiones de nostre proprie societate e que il ha textos sancte ancian sur le theiera. In iste caso le gente dicerea que un persona qui non credeva in le theiera es eccentric o folle.
Il ha numeros infinite de cosas como theieras celestial cuje manco de existentia nos non pote establir. Il ha fees, pro exemplo, e il ha unicornios e gnomos. Nos non pote probar que iste creaturas del imagination non existe in le realitate. Ma nos non crede que illos existe exactamente como nos non crede que le deos del Scandinavos, pro exemplo, ha ulle existential ver.
Nos es omnes atheistas sur quasi omne le deos create per societates in le passato. Alicunes de nos tamen prende le ultime passo de creder que le deo del judaeos e del christianos, como le deos del grecos e le egyptianos, anque non existe.