[quote author=“SkepticX”][quote author=“sidewalkjester”]In his Letter to a Christian Nation he makes his argument (somewhat flawed) that the word “atheism” should not exist. So, why do so many continue to refer to themselves as such?
Can you explain the flaw you see in the argument?
The flaw I believe is that the word does exist. And, I think Harris is entering a world of make-believe himself in this regard.
Although I would agree that referring one’s self as an atheist is incorrect, because it refer to the person in terms of the assumption of theism. I refer to myself as a Cynic (humanist). Cynic is my religion and humanism is the ontological assumption.
There are three ontological assumptions: humanism; agnostic; theism (atheism). Just as theism is divided into many religions and subdived into sects, humanism is to do as well. The problem being, humanists are so dispersed in demographics and discontent about the idea of organizing into communities pursuing a common moral philosophy as the better evolution of Mankind, that humanist subsist in their own chaos of democratic anarchy.
What I am saying is that the concept, “we’re all different, we only have the disbelief in gods in common,” is not exactly true, and it is a detrimental misconception that is frustrating the progression of humanism.
Agnostics have only the religion of Science. You see, secular science makes no assumption as to the existence of a supernatural. In effect science seeks to define a supernatural. Thus far, none can be determined, however, science has not concluded its investigation.
Basically, I think the word ‘atheist’ should be considered a slurr.