Good is Good

In the past, I've argued, like many atheists, against the appalling morals of the bible. Even the new testament has immoral acts being promoted in it. The first that comes to mind is that the only way God could help us poor sinful creatures (who were created by him, obviously imperfectly) was to have his son sacrificed. Seriously, is that really the best this barbaric god could come up with? Couldn't he find a better way to fix his mistakes? But I digress.

See, it's really easy to tear the bible apart with logic, a basis in good morality, reason, critical thinking and basic skepticism.

But what about the morals of actual Christians? Where do those morals come from - the Bible or elsewhere? If you ask a Christian they will say it all comes from the bible.

Certainly if you are a fundamentalist and you think the bible is the inerrant word of God, and you don't eat pork or shellfish, you think homosexuality is an abomination, you only wear one type of fabric at a time, you think owning slaves is fine as long as they come from other tribes, then you would think of yourself as a "good" Christian.

I would beg to differ. I'm talking about people who are genuinely good. So what defines a good person? I think there are two factors:

• Someone who attempts to make the lives of others better - The Golden Rule (should also include animals and the environment)
• Someone who purposefully does not negatively affect others - The Silver Rule

Morality and Ethics

Last night my friends and I were talking about ethics and morality and we sort of went in circles because we all seemed to have different ideas of what they were. Some expressed the idea that morals only come from religion so they avoided the word and used ethics instead.

Here is a concise explanation:

Morality is used to refer to what we would call moral standards and moral conduct while ethics is used to refer to the formal study of those standards and conduct. For this reason, the study of ethics is also often called "moral philosophy."

But in casual conversation the terms can be used interchangeably.

Morality:

(from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is a sense of behavioral conduct that differentiates intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good (or right) and bad (or wrong). A moral code is a system of morality (for example, according to a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc.) and a moral is any one practice or teaching within a moral code. Immorality is the active opposition to morality, while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles.

Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is the branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality.
The word 'ethics' is "commonly used interchangeably with 'morality' to mean the subject matter of this study; and sometimes it is used more narrowly to mean the moral principles of a particular tradition, group, or individual."

Ethics:

Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality — that is, concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice and crime, etc.

~

But on the subject of good and evil, I think they are definitely religious terms. I try to use words that describe what I'm expressing without the unhelpful loaded concepts. I use healthy and unhealthy, positive and negative, constructive and destructive.  This reflects my worldview as a naturalist where there is no supernatural or gods running the show.

How do you get your morality? We all learn from our parents, role models and peers, but have you reevaluated your code of ethics as you've matured?

Thought Experiment 198: Dreaming of Life

Here’s another Question for you. I’d love to know what your answer is!

Question 198: If you could pass your whole life cared for in every way as you slumbered peacefully, entranced by wonderful dreams, would you do so?

Of course, my first thought is of  The Matrix, where people live their whole lives in a virtual world. But in that movie they never knew it and it was against their will so they could be used as batteries. Also it wasn't always pleasant for them.

In this thought experiment, you get to choose to go into the sensory deprivation tank where you'll live out your whole life. In this scenario your life will be whatever you wish and can be completely positive. Also, once you're in the tank and dreaming, you won't remember that the 'real' world exists.

So would you do it?

My initial reaction is to say Hell Yes! Life in the real world is tough, painful, sometimes sad and lonely. So yes, a part of me would love to say yes. I wouldn't have to die, or if I did I could make sure it was peacefully at a very old age after a fantastic life full of love, happiness and laughter, surrounded by loved ones.

But after a minute I realize this is not such a good idea. First, I see it this way, I think we make our own purpose in life. Living so that others have to care for me and I am a drain on society isn't a good thing. Especially if I'm not giving anything back to them. That's the real problem. One goal I have in my life is to leave the world a better place than it was when I was born. I can't really do that if I'm dreaming my life away.

It also brings up the question. Are you really living if you're all in your head? I think if you thought that your dream was reality it wouldn't matter to you. You wouldn't know you were dreaming so it would be your reality.

Wasn't there a movie recently .. I can't remember what it was. It was Repo Men. It was an okay movie, but it sort of had to do with this exact idea. I don't want to give the plot away, though.

So what about you? Would you dream your life away if you could, in bliss? Why or why not?

 

 

The God Meme

The internet is full of memes. One of my favorites are the God Meme. Basically it' s a picture of The Almighty with a little bit about how he operates.

Instead of listing them in all their bad graphic glory, I am just going to write  them out for you. (I'm sure this breaks some uber-nerd interwebs code of ethics)

Create AIDs - Forbid condoms.

Help actresses win awards - Do nothing about world hunger.

Wrath is a sin - Blow up cities to show who's boss.

Bow before me.  - I need the attention.

Create homosexuals - Ban homosexuality.

No worshiping idols  - Hang a cross in your home.

Omnipotent, perfect - Jealous.

Create world for humans - 70% salt water.

Japanese wave at me - I wave back.

Jews are my chosen people - LOL Holocaust.

Day 1: create light - Day 4: create light source.

Humanity descended from one man and one woman - Who only had sons.

Imagination and Creativity

People generally feel they are creative or uncreative. But all of us use our imaginations all the time. So what are these things and can science explain them? Recently I've come to realize that there are things that I take for granted that religious people find completely mysterious, and therefore only God could make them happen. A lot of these mysteries are about the mind. Some examples are morality, love, compassion and imagination, among many others.

(as an aside, and if you're interested, a topic for later could be justice and fairness. I have found a huge difference between how I see them and how religious people see them.)

As a naturalist/atheist/skeptic/science lover, while I don't understand the physics, mechanics, biochemistry and biology of the workings of the brain, I understand that the mind is what is active in the brain. That's not the best wording, but basically the mind is just  the brain, but I think of it as RAM whereas the physical structure of the brain is more like the Hard Drive. If you have a better analogy, please share it. They are one and the same, essentially. Your mind is not separate from your brain.

Imagination: the ability of forming mental images, sensations and concepts, in a moment when they are not perceived through sight, hearing or other senses. Imagination is the work of the mind that helps create. Imagination helps provide meaning to experience and understanding to knowledge; it is a fundamental facility through which people make sense of the world, and it also plays a key role in the learning process.

Creativity: 1. having the ability to create. 2. characterized by originality of thought; having or showing imagination. 3. designed to or tending to stimulate the imagination.

So we all use our imaginations every time we have a thought that creates something in our minds that is not perceived through our senses. Like pink elephants with emerald green polka dots. If you can see them standing on top of each other in your head right now, you are using your imagination.

Soul Searching For Godless Heathens

I was recently asked about my worldview. Specifically I was asked what I find lacking in it. What do I see as flawed with it?

I've thought about this. I think by its very nature, my worldview is ideal for me. I don't see any flaws at all. But first, let's define it.

Worldview: 1. The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world. 2. A collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group.

So,  it's a very comprehensive set of beliefs about the world. And I'm very happy with the worldview I've thoughtfully developed. I will say it was a process, though, which is ongoing and, like all critical thinking, open to new information that can alter it.

Mine is based on Naturalism - a scientific account of the world in terms of causes and natural forces that rejects all spiritual, supernatural, or teleological explanations; Humanism - a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism and other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity; and Nature - nature is awesome and humans are responsible for taking care of the world to the best of our ability, and to be humane to other living creatures.

In those respects, science is very important to me because it's how we understand and progress. Through science the Universe gets to know itself (rough paraphrase from my hero, Carl Sagan), and we get to know our world and everything in it, including ourselves.

Science isn't everything though. There's also humanity and what we have developed*, such as consciousness and cognition, justice, beauty, love, humaneness, compassion, morality, genius, and on and on. (*note that there are animals that have some consciousness and self awareness, which is amazing and awesome. It shows that we are on the far end of the continuum, but still connected and an integral part of the animal kingdom!)

My worldview has been cultivated and formed over my life, but especially in the last 10 years since I've become an atheist. In other words, I've really thought about this, it isn't something told to me by anyone. And I think that's important for finding that it's complete and comfortable for me.

I thought I'd turn the question over to you. What is your worldview and do you feel yours has any flaws in it that bother you, that you find missing or less than fulfilling?

Some Lighthearted Fun, Kinda

Here are some random images and thoughts. Tomorrow is my local atheist group's Thanksgiving get together and I'll be busy making candied yams and eating tons of great food and hanging out with my fellow heathens. So I wanted to give you something beforehand. It's that time of year, too. What are you grateful for? I will list a few things below.

Here is a better bible, and it's only one page. It can fit on a sticky note:



But first, I require that you go first, God. Follow your own rule and Don't Be a DICK!

And God would reply (predictably), "Do as I say, not as I do."

Which leads me to ask you, if the god of Abraham (we'll assume he's the same one for the Jews, Christians and Muslims) exists as he is represented in his "holy" books, would you worship him?

I wouldn't. No way. What a complete and utter childish bully he is. And fickle!

While the above image is for a bit of humor, I'd say that's a pretty good place to start when putting together your moral code. I rewrote mine awhile ago - Neece's Principles. It's a great exercise that helps you realize what's important to you and why, instead of just doing what we were taught by our religious leaders and parents, who probably got their morals from their churches.

Starting To See Moral Relativism As Clearly Flawed

Most people don't think much about morality, in my observation. They are given their morals from their parents, pastors, teachers, and peers, etc. They don't need to know terms like "moral relativism". I have done just fine for 41 years without ever thinking about the definition of the term.

I think even once you eschew God and the bible, unless someone challenges you, you'll still rely on your basic moral code which you got when you were younger (and probably indoctrinated). A lot of that might evolve into what "feels" like the right thing to do, more than what the bible said.

Then there are those who think about this sort of thing all the time. I'm not one of those people, normally. I don't like philosophy very much. I prefer science and testable claims to pontificating about things that can't really ever be known. But as I venture on my Quest for Knowledge, lately I've run into philosophy more often.

I've even subjected you to it, such as the whole Free Will vs Determinism argument (which I still have plans to continue).

I think we are best served with examining our ethical code and reevaluating what's in there and why. I did that some time ago with my personal Principles. It was a challenging but rewarding exercise.

Side Note: The Rationally Speaking podcast recently interviewed Joshua Knobe about his new field of Experimental Philosophy (x-phi), which was fascinating. Joshua even made them (and me) gasp with the results of one study that was very surprising! Here's a link to the episode.

The book club I'm in, as I've mentioned, is going to be reading The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris. I lost interest in our current book, so I've started in on this one and so far Sam Harris is speaking my language, that science can determine values for conscious beings.

The following excerpt from the book shows what moral relativism basically is (the woman in it is definitely a moral relativist), and why it's clearly flawed. This is an anecdotal story from Sam. But I think it's quite important to share:

Excerpt from The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values by Sam Harris. - Highlight Location 765-83 (chapter 1)

We already have good reason to believe that certain cultures are less suited to maximizing well-being than others. I cited the ruthless misogyny and religious bamboozlement of the Taliban as an example of a worldview that seems less than perfectly conducive to human flourishing.

The Moral Landscape: A First Look

I just started reading The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values by Sam Harris for my local book club. I'm not very far into it. So far I'm just getting an idea of where he's coming from and what he proposes to convince me of as I read along.

Before I started reading, I listened to Professor Massimo Pigliucci and Julia Galef talk about the book on their podcast, Rationally Speaking episode 20, from 18:29 to 27:30. Both of them find fault in Sam Harris’ logic and principles.

Massimo also wrote a blog post back in April titled, About Sam Harris’ claim that science can answer moral questions. This article is based on the TED Talk that Harris gave back in February.

Massimo is a former scientist and is now a philosopher, so he is well equipped to address this subject.

I thought I'd share it and ask you, have you read the book? What do you think? Can science answer moral questions?

The Humanist Ten Commandments

For the book club I belong to, we're reading Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe by Greg Epstein. It's basically all about Humanism.

From the AHA: Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism and other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity. Fred Edwords explains the many different kinds of humanism here, then goes on to explain more about Modern Humanism.

Anyway, in Good Without God, Epstein has a chart of the ten commandments. I wanted to share it with you because I thought the Humanist version was pretty good:

Exodus 20		King James Version		Modern Version		Humanist Version
1		20:2-3 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.		Do not worship any other god.		Seek the best in yourself and in others, and believe in your own ability to make a positive difference in the world.
2		20:4-6 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.		Do not make or worship idols or images of God.		Pursue truth and honesty in all you do; and be wary of allowing power, status or possessions to substitute for moral courage, dignity and goodness.
3		20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.		Do not misuse the name of God.		Be positive and constructive rather than negative and disrespectful.
4		20:8-11 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.		Keep the sabbath day holy. You must rest on that day each week.		To be healthy, you must balance work, play and rest.
5		20:12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.		Honor your father and mother.		All members of the family should respect each other.
6		20:13 Thou shalt not kill.		Do not commit murder.		Same.
7		20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.		Do not be unfaithful to your husband or wife.		Same.
8		20:15 Thou shalt not steal.		Do not steal.		Same.
9		20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.		Do not lie or speak badly about others.		Same.
10		20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.		Do not be jealous of other people, and do not desire other people's spouses, houses, or anything else they have.		When you see nice things owned by others, let them be your inspiration, rather than a source of bad feelings. If there are things that you want, work hard to get them.

Epstein goes through each one of these and explains in much more detail what they mean.

I rather like most of the Humanist version. I especially like 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10. I have problems with 5 though.

What I Stand For and What I Believe

One of my Facebook friends, Mark, wrote a note the other day about what he believes and what he stands for. He inspired me and I decided to do the same:

I don't believe in nothing. I believe in grand concepts like the pursuit of love and happiness. I believe in finding simple joys in everyday things.

I embrace knowledge and growth through learning as much as possible. I love science and the scientific method, which although flawed, is still the best tool we've got to understand our fantastic universe and our place in it. I am a citizen scientist.

I require evidence for claims and refuse to accept things on faith or authority. I am a skeptic.

But I am a true skeptic. Many times in the past I've changed my views based on evidence that showed that my old thinking was wrong. I constantly work on detaching my ego from my world view.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and since there is zero credible evidence for any gods or the supernatural, I don't believe in them. I don't believe in the supernatural in any sense. No gods, no heaven, no hell, no demons, no ghosts, no psychic powers. I am a skeptical atheist.

Determinism and Free Will 2a of 4

Recently, I wrote about Determinism and Free Will. It was basically an introduction and consisted of a transcript of the Reasonable Doubts guys. Well, this is the first half of their second episode on the subject. I decided to break it up into two posts because, as you can see, it's incredibly long. And it was taking me forever to transcribe it.

So in this part, the guys are talking about determinism again, especially in regards to how to deal with people who break the law or do something wrong. This is a very touchy subject but the guys explain it well, especially when they talk about parenting.

Here you go:

1:56 Dave (D): So in our previous episode, Free Willy vs the Determinator part 1, we talked some about determinism and free will, but we didn't get to the moral implications associated with a hardcore determinist world view like the three of us seem to share. And not all naturalists do.

Jeremy (J): No, we need to acknowledge that there is diversity amongst naturalists. I will say I don't feel bad going further in saying, though, I think they're wrong. I think they're demonstrably wrong. I think accepting determinism, unfortunately or not, is necessitated by a consistently naturalistic world view. But there are people who disagree.

D: But it's a very hard thing to do, and it took me a very long time to just decide that, "yes, in fact I'm going to follow the evidence", because you're giving up a lot of things, apparently.

J: You're giving up things you never had.

D: Well, yeah. But things that I thought I had.

Determinism and Free Will 1 of 4

Let's talk about Free Will versus Determinism. I first learned about this philosophical and practical debate while listening to the Reasonable Doubts podcast, which I've recommended to you in the past. They have done four episodes, plus one bonus interview with a christian apologist radio show that is too painful to sit through, on this topic. It is so interesting and important that I am going to transcribe the relevant sections of all four episodes for you. (I don't transcribe the other topics of the episode, and skip half thoughts, etc. I recommend listening to them in full)

They all build on each other. The first episode (below) was the hardest for me to grasp. I had never heard of Determinism before, and had always assumed we have free will. So if you're new to it, it seems harsh and unnatural. But stick with it. The following 3 episodes clear up a lot of the questions raised in this one. Unfortunately it takes quite some time to type them out so try to be patient with me.

Reasonable Doubts, Episode 29: Free Willy vs The Determinator

Starts at 21:16

Definition of Free Will (24:30): This is the definition that christian apologist and philosopher J.P. Moreland would take: He calls it Libertarian Agency. You are a free agent. Your actions do not have prior causes. You are the unmoved mover if you have free will. You choose to do something. You could have chosen otherwise. Not only can you initiate actions, you can also stop actions, or choose not to act. Basically we're all little gods, in a way.

26:25 Determinism in a nutshell is the opposite of that. There are external and internal forces that influence your behavior. Commonly people think of determinism as you couldn't have done otherwise. You're standing there with the gun pointed at somebody and you're forced to pull the trigger. But really it means simply that there are reasons for your behavior, forces and factors at play, external and internal prior causes. When you are making choices those choices are not uncaused. There is a chain of causes. Your choice is the effect of prior causes.

12 Questions About Morals By Sam Harris

Sam Harris wrote an article answering 12 questions relating to his book, The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, which is due to be released October 5th:

1. Are there right and wrong answers to moral questions?

Morality must relate, at some level, to the well-being of conscious creatures. If there are more and less effective ways for us to seek happiness and to avoid misery in this world -- and there clearly are -- then there are right and wrong answers to questions of morality.

2. Are you saying that science can answer such questions?

Yes, in principle. Human well-being is not a random phenomenon. It depends on many factors -- ranging from genetics and neurobiology to sociology and economics. But, clearly, there are scientific truths to be known about how we can flourish in this world. Wherever we can have an impact on the well-being of others, questions of morality apply.

3. But can't moral claims be in conflict? Aren't there many situations in which one person's happiness means another's suffering?

Problems of Philosophy: MIT Lecture Notes Available

I thought I'd share this. MIT Open Courseware Lecture Notes from Problems of Philosophy. Here are the topics covered and available (in pdf format):

Reason to Believe: Does God Exist?

• Existence of God: Ontological Argument


• Problem of Evil I


• Problem of Evil II


• Pascal's Wager

Rationality and Belief

• Ethics of Belief: Evidentialism v. Pragmatism


• Racism and Belief


• Stereotypes and Belief


• Scientific Reason or Scientific Faith?


• More on Science and Faith

Mind and Body

Hitchens Is Right, The Creationism Debate Is Over!

Here is a clip of Christopher Hitchens in a debate with John Haldane. (~5 min)



I agree, the debate is over. Creationism has no validity. We are evolved creatures, and part of our evolution is a basic sense of morality. Not a moral absolute, of course, but even apes and dogs have been shown to have morals. We don't need god to be good. In fact, I'd say god makes it harder to be good for the right reason, especially since the god of Abraham is so amoral.

Homosexuality is a SIN, The Bible Says So!

Anyone who follows the bible as the word of god usually cherry picks just the verses that suit his or her personal moral values, or more accurately, those values foisted on them by their religious leader.

Here is a typical argument from a christian.

"Patti: Homosexuality is a sin and it is in black and white in the bible."

Patti is right. But Lacey shows what else the old testament claims are sins, which we no longer follow in our modern society:

"So is not treating your body like a temple (no more Doritos and bon bons, no more Coke or Pepsi or ice cream or potato chips!). And ladies should have their head covered. And in Deuteronomy, a marriage is only valid if the woman is a virgin, and she should be executed if she is not... and that anyone who commits adultery should be stone to death.

In Mark, divorce is prohibited. I assume for homosexuality you are referring to Leviticus 18A:6 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination." A similar verse occurs two chapters later, in Leviticus 20:13: "A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed."

Leviticus is a holy code written 3,000 years ago. It also includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics (no poly cotton blends), eating pork or shellfish, getting your fortune told, and even playing with the skin of a pig (there goes football!).

I believe in morality, which is doing right regardless of what I am told.. not in religion which is doing what I am told regardless of what is right. You're welcome to your own interpretation of the bible and of politics, of course, but for me, I need more than "the bible says so" to justify certain things in this world and certainly to judge them."

I would add that the bible as a code of ethics is just about bankrupt. Even the few good things that Jesus said are not unique or special to the bible. I certainly don't need to turn to it for anything, never mind my morals and ethics.

How many times have you discussed morals with a christian and they say something like, "If god didn't exist, I'd rape, murder and steal!" Those people need religion, if that's the only thing holding them back from their psychopathic and sociopathic drives.

For me, I'm quite happy to be a good person just because it's the right thing to do. What about you?

Image found here.

Jesus Was a Rationalist?

Recently I got an email from someone who said the following:

"I think that rationality and free thinking should be promoted and religious crimes and excesses and crimes condemned. What we hear and read about the churches is absolutely disgusting. However, if have a close look at the gospels, I find it to be such a rational, incredibly intelligent sum of stories, considering the time and the audience Jesus Christ was talking to. I think he was one of the greatest rationalists ever!"

I agree with him about reason, rationality and critical thinking. I don't agree about the bible though. It's so full of justified hate and bad morals.  I think that overrides the precious few rational or intelligent concepts that are scattered infrequently within. The few good things you can find in the bible are not original either. The Golden Rule, for example. Older than Jesus. Confucious had his own version, so did the Greeks. So there's really no need for the bible at all!

Also, Jesus said some pretty damned hateful things in the gospels. (see below for just a few) He was forever going on about how if you didn't follow him you'd burn in hell. That's not very rational or loving. He also said he talked in parables just to confuse people so they would end up in hell. And he said to hate your family. If you take one message of Jesus and hold it up as a shining example for good rational thinking, you really can't cherry-pick. You have to take all of his hateful stuff too.
Sure, maybe he said some good things (IF he existed, which I doubt), but it wasn't anything that amazing when put in context with all the awful stuff he said, or when you think about great thinkers who said awesome things more consistently, like Carl Sagan, Thomas Jefferson, Bertrand Russell or even Ricky Gervais!

Here are a few quotes from and about Jesus that the cherry-pickers missed:

Talk To An Atheist on Atheist Hotline

For some time I’ve been working behind the scenes on a way for atheists and people questioning their faith to talk to someone who can give some friendly atheist advice. With the help of my fellow Morgantown Atheists friends, we have started a voice mail system, an email address and a website called Atheist Hotline!

Ways to Contact Us:

• AtheistHotline.com


• (304) 534-9440


• atheisthotline@morgantownatheists.com

You can call, email or post a question on the site now. The phone number is to a voice mail system. We are volunteering this service so we will get back to you as soon as we can. Leave your email address if you call, too please. It will be easiest for us to get back to you by email.

Our Goals:

• Let atheists know they are not alone


• Clear up common misconceptions about atheists in general


• Provide people with information resources when needed


• Personal experiences from atheists to help you with your perspective


• Carefully helping people who are questioning their faith - in need of reason, etc.


• Carefully helping atheists who have troubles with their family


• Offering moral support to atheists and people questioning their faith


• Friendly advice from atheists

What we're NOT:

Four Interesting Videos Supporting Reason

I have four videos to share with you, and they all have to do with Sam Harris, one of the Four Horsemen (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett are the other three). Remember the other day I posted the actual TED talk Sam did about science and morality.

The first video is on CNN Opinion and therefore it's just a link to its page. Sam talks to CNN (at the TED conference) about how religion discussions distract us from truly important issues. It's almost 4 minutes long. If you go there to the page, it has a lot of what he said under the video.

Project Reason, which Sam Harris helped start, had a video contest recently. So here are the winners.

Winning Video: The Values We All Stand For