The World’s Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Paul Kurtz - "I refuse to be defined... as an Atheist"

A few days ago on NPR I heard about a growing schism in the atheist movement. I was surprised it made the news at all. But that evening I also heard the Center for Inquiry podcast pitting Paul Kurtz, its founder, against the present leadership and the direction CFI is currently taking. Here is a part of that podcast and the issues at stake.

The entire podcast is 26 minutes and is the tip of what might become a defining moment in both the Atheist and Secular Humanist movement. A divide might become inevitable.

In the podcast Paul explains why he refuses to be defined as simply an atheist and why he is against Blasphemy Day.

From the Point of Inquiry podcast: "Paul Kurtz - A kinder, Gentler Secularism"
Posted on 8-14-2009, 26:12min.

Link to CFI podcast:
[http://www.pointofinquiry.org/paul_kurtz_a_kinder_gentler_secularism/]

Here is a short transcription between D.J. Grothe and Paul Kurtz:

DJ: Paul, of course you are an atheist, you lack belief in god, and that’s what atheism means, right?

PK: No! It means many things; I’m a non-theist, I’m an agnostic, I do not believe in god, but I think it’s a terrible mistake to identify our whole movement with atheism, because that is negative, its what you DON’T believe in, and what is important is what we affirm! We believe in the fulfillment of human life, and social justice, and creativity, and that’s why I refuse to be defined simply as an atheist.

--

My 2 cents: As a somewhat militant agnostic (I’m still trying to leave the door open for the "possibility" of a god -- in the spirit of a true scientist), I nevertheless agree with Paul’s perspective, though I admit I didn’t before I heard the podcast.

Paul’s vision reflects his wisdom gained from countless years of experience in dealing with the human condition regarding these subjects and his focus remains on the primary goal! He relegates to lesser importance the real or imagined beliefs people contrive for themselves about the world, but how we respect and treat each other!

In that context Paul is, and remains, the torchbearer of reason behind the inquiring mind; not just the truth, but the greater capacity for good that it brings.

Thank you Paul Kurtz.

Tags: Inquiry, Kurtz, Paul, Point, atheism, blasphemy, day, humanism, of, secular

0 members like this

Attachments:

paul kurtz.jpg, 6 KB

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by The Nerd on October 20, 2009 at 7:53am

Hehe, I like how he says "non-theist" as if the "non" is any less negative than the "a" in "atheist".

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Caine on October 25, 2009 at 6:38pm

Well I see a bit of a difference in the flavor of the term. Atheist carries more of the sense of "I believe positively there is NOT a god" Where as Non-theist comes across as "I don't believe in gods or religion" There is a slight difference between there IS NOT and I DON'T BELIEVE IN.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard S. Dunn on May 30, 2010 at 12:55am

My friend Ken - a scientist - tries to make this same point. I fail to see it. Atheist doesn't carry that sense. It might be read that way - but that is not what it means. And it is truly splitting hairs to try and draw a line between someone who gives no credence to the existence of a god and a person who says there is no god. I don't even see the slightest difference.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Neeven Soodyall on October 22, 2009 at 10:20am

nor the "a" in "agnostic".

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by D.O.S on October 20, 2009 at 8:02am

His objection does seem to be largely semantic in nature. Whether you like the term or not, if you believe that there is no god you are an atheist. He also seems to be caught up in some of the long standing myths and stereotypes about us. Yes, atheism is to some degree about what you don't believe but in the end labels mean what we say they do. I say atheism can be a positive label.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by D.O.S on October 20, 2009 at 8:06am

Kurtz is also partially right about being respectful. But, only partially. If you don't earn my respect I'm not giving it to you as a gift. Religions don't want to be attacked then they need to stop attacking us. I believe in being civil and backing up your opinions but beyond that I see no reason to pull punches when we are confronted on a daily basis by what other say we should or shouldn't believe.

That said I do have a great deal of respect for Kurtz and sincerely hope he continues to express his views.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Wise on October 20, 2009 at 9:36am

The main thing I agree with Kurtz about this is not wanting to be defined simply by what you don't believe. That doesn't really say anything about you.

I embrace the lable "atheist" anyway though, partly because there's no getting around it. To a theist I could say I'm a Secular Humanist, and they won't get it it will always come back to "but you don't believe in God right? So you're an atheist." Also since there are so many negative stereotypes out there connected to atheist, I think it's important to go ahead and embrace the lable to dispell those stereotypes.

I also disagree with Kurtz about Blasphemy Day. The point is to show that even religion shouldn't be s topic immune from criticism. And blasphemous talk isn't always ridicule. Simply criticising religion can be considered blasphemy. So when it comes down to it, blasphemy day is really a free speech issue.

To be fair I have not yet listened to that PoI podcast, but did hear the NPR article.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The Nerd on October 20, 2009 at 9:40am

On Blasphemy Day, I shared a Jesus & Mo comic, then listed all the gods I stick my tongue out at from religions all around the world, old and new (Zeus, Oden, The Great Spirit, YHWH, Shiva, etc.). I didn't make fun of anyone in particular, and I wasn't obscene. I think I got my point across very nicely. For that reason, Blasphemy Day is very useful at showing that this topic cannot be placed "off limits".

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sonny Mobley on October 20, 2009 at 11:59am

hahahahahha

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard S. Dunn on December 12, 2009 at 1:07am

That is AWESOME! Ouch - my petard is stretched to the limit!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on October 20, 2009 at 1:36pm

I can't blame Paul for not wanting to be called an atheist. It has a lot of baggage. If I am talking to someone I have just met or work with I say I am the following... in this order.

1) I am not really very religious
2) I am not religious
3) I am a Humanist
4) I don't believe in anything supernatural
5) I am an atheist

Sounds like Paul is at about a 3.5 to 4.5 on my scale.

I still say all the discussion is good. You can scream the message or you can talk softly. You can shake hands with the abortion protesters or you can flip them the bird. Just don't stay quiet!!!!