• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Something I noticed about Atheism Double Plus Good

mick1le2pick

New Member
arg-fallbackName="mick1le2pick"/>
Look at this

"We are"¦"¨
Atheists plus we care about social justice,"¨
Atheists plus we support women's rights,
"¨Atheists plus we protest racism,"¨
Atheists plus we fight homophobia and transphobia,
"¨Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism."

What's left out is more important than what is put in. It misses out fighting censorship.

It also says "we use critical thinking and skepticism", notice the lack of an always, giving them the freedom to only use skepticism some of the time.

Also it says "we support women's rights" not gender equality.

Making I looking into it too much, but it is interesting. But the fact 3 could be combined into one which would cover more by saying that they will fight bigotry is another thing I find odd.

If I was making one it would be like this

We will always fight bigotry
We will always fight censorship
We will always fight superstition
We will always question ourselves
We will always be skeptical
We will always remain curious
We will always be open-minded

What do you think?
 
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
I think two things:

1. As I understand it, that is only Richard Carrier's interpretation of ADPG.
2. Your alternative makes the same mistake they do, namely that there is nothing inherent that connects atheism to any of those things - it's like calling yourself Marmiteist+ (not only do I like Marmite, I also disapprove of golf, high-fives, and Finland). If you believe otherwise, you are simply wrong.

PZ Meyers tried a year or two ago to redefine atheism (referring to people like myself in derogatory fashion as "dictionary atheists"), falling flat on his arse like a latter day Fatty Arbuckle. I think the whole ADPG thing is quarantined, and I don't think they have an adequate supply of luck virus*.


*References, memes, and in-jokes based on episodes of Red Dwarf are probably the property of Grant/Naylor.
 
arg-fallbackName="Visaki"/>
Prolescum said:
I think two things:

1. As I understand it, that is only Richard Carrier's interpretation of ADPG.
2. Your alternative makes the same mistake they do, namely that there is nothing inherent that connects atheism to any of those things - it's like calling yourself Marmiteist+ (not only do I like Marmite, I also disapprove of golf, high-fives, and Finland). If you believe otherwise, you are simply wrong.

PZ Meyers tried a year or two ago to redefine atheism (referring to people like myself in derogatory fashion as "dictionary atheists"), falling flat on his arse like a latter day Fatty Arbuckle. I think the whole ADPG thing is quarantined, and I don't think they have an adequate supply of luck virus*.


*References, memes, and in-jokes based on episodes of Red Dwarf are probably the property of Grant/Naylor.
That's it. You're on the list now, buddy! And you know what happens to people who are on the list, don't you?

I think I predicted a fight among the people who want to define A+ over the right to define it (and take credit for it). I've seen at least a few people pointing at other peoples defenition and saying "that's not what A+ is about". A+ is a house, and the people planning it are putting up walls and taking down others without any regand for structural safety or the oppinions of others, making people not really involved in the project to scratch their heads and wonder if they are all just in it for the drama.
 
arg-fallbackName="mick1le2pick"/>
Prolescum said:
I think two things:
2. Your alternative makes the same mistake they do, namely that there is nothing inherent that connects atheism to any of those things - it's like calling yourself Marmiteist+ (not only do I like Marmite, I also disapprove of golf, high-fives, and Finland). If you believe otherwise, you are simply wrong.

*References, memes, and in-jokes based on episodes of Red Dwarf are probably the property of Grant/Naylor.

I agree with you on that, my point was, though, that if they wanted a set of ideas to base a secular community on, I think my one is better.

I also agree that they should have chose a different name.

They also basically plagiarized the logo from an atheist charity drive.
 
arg-fallbackName="bluejatheist"/>
Check out the "Godless Bitches" podcast for episodes dealing with A+

I listened to it and it made me less cynical about it and I'd say it convinced me that they are using some sound reasoning though I'm not too interested in it, the FTB crap happening lately has lead to me considering myself associated with the skeptic movement in general vs the atheist movement, though I'm not involved in much anyways
 
Back
Top