"Religion for Atheists"

A New TED Talk: Alain de Botton advocates "Atheism 2.0," because we all need "connection, ritual and transcendence." In his post-talk exchange he's even explicit that atheists need "religion" so as not to be "cut off" from morality. Comments?

A new thread for introductions, Doubt Quiz etc.

I'll start a new thread here for introductions and any other fresh comments anyone would like to add (including your thoughts on the Doubt Quiz in Jennifer Hecht's introduction to Doubt: A History).

At least one person has reported having difficulties publishing here. You can also use the "comments" section to request technical assistance from your classmates. Or just send me your post and I'll put it up for you.

BTW: Did anyone hear Lawrence Krauss on the radio yesterday? Very interesting on "a universe from nothing." (See the link in my morning post.) And I'm reminded of his previous interest in the question of facts & values, which he discussed a couple years ago with philosophers including Sam Harris. Remind of that when we get to Harris in March.

A few points about the class discussion today...

I thought it might be better to start a new pool of comments here, rather than continue to clutter up the Welcome post, so here we go. I wanted to float a few thoughts, and it's obviously going to be easier to flesh out ideas in this format (as opposed to group discussion.)

1. For starters, I wanted to start a discussion regarding the definition of atheist. If theism is held to be the belief that at least one deity exists (and for practical purposes a deity that actually interacts in some way with our plane of existence), then an atheist would simply be a person who lacks this belief, or actively disbelieves it. That doesn't seem too complicated to me, but perhaps you think these definitions are too narrow.

Simply put, if your deity (or transcendent being, or Divine, or Grand Architect, or Ground of All Being, or Whatever) takes an interest in or interferes with our universe-in any way-then your belief would seem to be consistent with theism. If not, perhaps another label would be better suited as a description of what you believe (goodness knows that there are more than enough labels on offer.)

2. I heard someone (I don't remember exactly who) say something to the effect of "beliefs are shown to be true by virtue of the fact that they motivate people to actions." I'm sure that I'm not representing this entirely accurately, but I think the story of the old lady in the hospital who was the recipient of a spiritual visitation was the genesis of it.

What this story seemed to discount was the fact that people can be motivated (for better and for worse) by beliefs that are based on a premise that is totally and unequivocally false. Consider the following scenario: Alice receives a phone call informing her that she has won the $200 million dollar Publisher's Clearing House Sweepstakes. She enters the sweepstakes religiously, and so has no reason to doubt the veracity of the call. She is, of course, deliriously happy. She is immediately flooded with positive emotions, and goes on a whirlwind of selfless behavior. She depletes her savings in order to buy friends and relatives gifts, knowing that she will soon be rich beyond her wildest dreams. She donates most of her possessions to charity, knowing that she will soon replace them with new ones. She pledges money to help the poor in her community, and makes plans to establish a trust to service those less privileged than her.

But of course you see where this is going. It turns out that the phone call was a cruel and elaborate hoax: she was never the grand prize winner. Her belief that she was a winner, even though it motivated her to do good deeds, was based on an untruth. Her belief was genuine, but the object of that belief was not.

Welcome!

Welcome to the new "Atheism & Philosophy" site, supporting the eponymous MTSU course. We will meet on Tuesday and Thursday afternoons at 2:40 in James Union Building room #202 during the Spring 2012 semester, beginning January 12.

For now, at least, this site is private and limited to "authors" (students) only. Please post anything you consider relevant and interesting. When we formally begin, everyone will be expected to post pertinent questions and comments prior to each class.

The syllabus page link is posted in the right margin.

Note the "Books" section below the syllabus link. The texts we'll definitely be reading this semester bear the parenthetical notation ('12)... and if we decide to add another text, we'll make that decision as a class. So if you have any suggestions let us know.

I'll soon also add a section of blog and video links, if you have any favorites to share please pass them along too.

If you want to get started reading and thinking, we'll begin by splitting Rebecca Goldstein's "36 Arguments" amongst ourselves and discussing (see her "appendix" in the aforementioned "Books" section). Then, we'll move on to Baggini's Atheism.

But before that, we'll discuss Jennifer Michael Hecht's "Scale of Doubt" Quiz.

And before that, we'll introduce ourselves. I  invite everyone to post a biographical introduction (where you're from, where you're going, what you love, why you're taking this course, whatever else you want to tell us) and responses to these questions: 1) Do you consider yourself a good person? 2) Why or why not?

See you in class!

JPO

Testimonial | Pharyngula

Final short essay/presentation suggestion:"Why I am/am not an Atheist" - due April 2012.

We'll read many model philosophical testimonials in the Antony and Blackford anthologies. Here are more, cataloged at P.Z. Myers' site: Testimonial | Pharyngula:

And here's a kinder & gentler format some of you may prefer to model your own testimonial on: This I Believe...

But if you'd rather not testify in any format, feel free to propose an alternative final report project (presentation or essay).