Dear Cliff Walker,
I have been reading with interest much of the stuff in your site and enjoying it. I was specially interested in the articles on the nature of atheism, noncognitivism etc., since I wrote a related article myself. You can look at it if you wish and provide your feedback (will be appreciated). It is located here:
Hope to keep browsing your site with so much useful and informative stuff. Great site!
From: "Positive Atheism" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Atheism, noncognitivism.
Date: September 10, 2001 6:16 PM
Your point about the laws of physics providing a plausible explanation is good. After reading Victor Stenger's latest book, Has Science Found God?, I take this whole question one step further and acknowledge that many of the god-claims we hear these days could be verified by physics. This is particularly true of the claims for the existence of the Christian deity. However, when we have put these claims to the test, physics has only refuted them.
As for your definition of atheism, your need to come up with a rather large number of sub-categories, such as "infidel-1" and even "agnostic" shows only that the traditional definition for atheism is the simplest. The traditional definition is, "one who lacks theism (or a god-belief) for whatever reason." With it, one is either a theist or is not a theist (is an atheist). This leaves room, of course, to further distinguish among both groups, but at least web have established the two main categories. This done, further questions become much simpler to deal with. But by describing nine different categories right from the start, only confusion can result -- and the whole point of writing, to me, is to get rid of confusion!
Positive Atheism Magazine
Six years of service to
people with no reason to believe
Thanks for the prompt response. I appreciate your time to go through my article and providing your thoughtful critique. I will certainly give it due consideration and have in fact already made some changes.
I think the James Watson quote I saw was in a book called "The End of science" by John Horgan. I may be wrong. Unfortunately I don't have it with me now to verify.
Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.