Trouble at t'mill.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Recent shenanigans in the celebrity and online atheist community.
Featuring Dr Richard Dawkins.
https://youtu.be/2luxt4xmdfM?si=DDx-_zBrsONSYHdf

[Nearly Sane]

Recent shenanigans in the celebrity and online atheist community.
Featuring Dr Richard Dawkins.
https://youtu.be/2luxt4xmdfM?si=DDx-_zBrsONSYHdf

Things atheists have in common: lack of belief in a god(s).

[Maeght]

Recent shenanigans in the celebrity and online atheist community.
Featuring Dr Richard Dawkins.
https://youtu.be/2luxt4xmdfM?si=DDx-_zBrsONSYHdf

No such thing as an atheist community. Just atheists sharing a lack of belief in God or gods.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No such thing as an atheist community. Just atheists sharing a lack of belief in God or gods.

Well either these people are wrong....
https://atheist-community.org/

Or you are.

[Maeght]

Well either these people are wrong....
https://atheist-community.org/

Or you are.

They are.

If you take the Merriam-Webster Definition of Community you get

1: a unified body of individuals: such as
a: the people with common interests living in a particular area broadly : the area itself the problems of a large community
b: a group of people with a common characteristic or interest living together within a larger society a community of retired persons a monastic community
c: a body of persons of common and especially professional interests scattered through a larger society, the academic community, the scientific community
d: a body of persons or nations having a common history or common social, economic, and political interests, the international community
e: a group linked by a common policy
f: an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (such as species) in a common location
g: state, commonwealth

a: fails by atheists only sharing one common interest
b: fails by the living together aspect
c: fails due to the common interests
d: fails due to not having a common history
e: fails as there are no common policies
f: fail due to location
g: not a state

[Nearly Sane]

They are.

If you take the Merriam-Webster Definition of Community you get

1: a unified body of individuals: such as
a: the people with common interests living in a particular area broadly : the area itself the problems of a large community
b: a group of people with a common characteristic or interest living together within a larger society a community of retired persons a monastic community
c: a body of persons of common and especially professional interests scattered through a larger society, the academic community, the scientific community
d: a body of persons or nations having a common history or common social, economic, and political interests, the international community
e: a group linked by a common policy
f: an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (such as species) in a common location
g: state, commonwealth

a: fails by atheists only sharing one common interest
b: fails by the living together aspect
c: fails due to the common interests
d: fails due to not having a common history
e: fails as there are no common policies
f: fail due to location
g: not a state

Hmm.. surely the Atheist Community of Austin are one by definition a?

Vlad's question is effectively a false dichotomy. It's possible for some atheists to band together as a community but that doesn't mean all atheists are part of an overall community.

[Maeght]

Hmm.. surely the Atheist Community of Austin are one by definition a?

Vlad's question is effectively a false dichotomy. It's possible for some atheists to band together as a community but that doesn't mean all atheists are part of an overall community.

a: says common interests not one interest.

If the common interests are more than being an atheist then it isn't an atheist community.

That's how i see it anyway.

[Nearly Sane]

a: says common interests not one interest.

If the common interests are more than being an atheist then it isn't an atheist community.

That's how i see it anyway.

Perhaps you and I disagreeing is more shenanigans in the online atheist community to Vlad? 

[Maeght]

Perhaps you and I disagreeing is more shenanigans in the online atheist community to Vlad? 

Yeah, probably 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Hmm.. surely the Atheist Community of Austin are one by definition a?

Vlad's question is effectively a false dichotomy. It's possible for some atheists to band together as a community but that doesn't mean all atheists are part of an overall community.

Do you think then, that it would be better to talk about the atheist population?
I did say the celebrity and online communities though Not an overall atheist community., so you may like to revise your post.

[Nearly Sane]

Do you think then, that it would be better to talk about the atheist population?
I did say the celebrity and online communities though Not an overall atheist community., so you may like to revise this post.

Not really. The 'celebrity and online communitirs' are not a self defined group like the Austin one. So the issue with the overall idea applies to that grouping as well.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Perhaps you and I disagreeing is more shenanigans in the online atheist community to Vlad? 

with Maeght as Hemet Mehta and yourself as Dawkins?

[Maeght]

with Maeght as Hemet Mehta and yourself as Dawkins?

Who is Hemet Mehta?

[Nearly Sane]

Who is Hemet Mehta?

No idea but then we're probably saying that as part of our cunning plan to deny we're part of the 'community'. I'm just worried Vlad has cast me as Dawkins, given Vlad's obsession with him.

[Maeght]

No idea but then we're probably saying that as part of our cunning plan to deny we're part of the 'community'. I'm just worried Vlad has cast me as Dawkins, given Vlad's obsession with him.

Drat, rumbled .....

[SteveH]

Of course there's an atheist community. It is represented by, inter alia, Humanists UK and the National Secular Society - and if they've got enough in common to form societies, they must be a community.

[Nearly Sane]

Of course there's an atheist community. It is represented by, inter alia, Humanists UK and the National Secular Society - and if they've got enough in common to form societies, they must be a community.

Those are communities, though neither the Humanists or the NSS require someone to be an atheist to be a member, nor do they represent me.

It also doesn't follow that because some atheists form communities that all atheists are part of a community

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No idea but then we're probably saying that as part of our cunning plan to deny we're part of the 'community'. I'm just worried Vlad has cast me as Dawkins, given Vlad's obsession with him.

I follow what goes on in both the Christian and atheist communities in America and Dawkins has gone from being the toast of the atheist world to a bit of an embarrassment to the likes of leading public atheists like Dillahunty and Mehta.

[ProfessorDavey]

Of course there's an atheist community. It is represented by, inter alia, Humanists UK and the National Secular Society - and if they've got enough in common to form societies, they must be a community.

Not really - unsurprisingly HumanistsUK and the NSS represent ... err ... humanists and secularists respectively, who may, or may not be atheist. And while they may represent a humanist or secular community they are not the humanist or secular community as there will be plenty of people who consider themselves to be humanists and secularists who do not consider themselves to be represented by HumanistsUK or the NSS, anymore than all Christians would consider themselves to be part of and represented by the Catholic church.

[Gordon]

I follow what goes on in both the Christian and atheist communities in America and Dawkins has gone from being the toast of the atheist world to a bit of an embarrassment to the likes of leading public atheists like Dillahunty and Mehta.

I have only one question, Vlad: why the fuck are you bothered about this?

[Nearly Sane]

I follow what goes on in both the Christian and atheist communities in America and Dawkins has gone from being the toast of the atheist world to a bit of an embarrassment to the likes of leading public atheists like Dillahunty and Mehta.

The vast majority of people who lack a belief in god(s) will have no clue who Dillahunty and Mehta are. Just as there isn't an atheist community, there isn't an atheist world. Indeed there's not a theist community or theist world either.

Having a belief in God or lacking such a belief tells you nothing about the person beyond that.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I have only one question, Vlad: why the fuck are you bothered about this?

Do you realise how funny that question sounds coming from a contributor to ReligionEthics?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The vast majority of people who lack a belief in god(s) will have no clue who Dillahunty and Mehta are.

But they do know who Dawkins is.

[Nearly Sane]

Do you realise how funny that question sounds coming from a contributor to ReligionEthics?

Is there a bit in the board membership where it lists not thinking what Matt Dillahunty thinks of Richard Dawkins.is a requirement? 

[Nearly Sane]

But they do know who Dawkins is.

All atheists? No, but he's better known generally I think than Dillahunty and Mehta. Lots of theists have heard of Dawkins as well. In your approach, I suppose all of them are part of the knows of Dawkins community.