It seems to me us sceptics and secularists look to governments to address problems other organizations tackle hands on. Perhaps it's time we took a page from thier book, organize ourselves and find a voice in our communities.

The "church" I have been attending for the last little while is a Unitarian congregation. They welcome everybody as long as they agree with their principles (none of which insist on believing in God). If you don't believe in a deity, you can use the service to meditate, or whatever.

Anyhow, one of the things I noticed is that there are various groups that meet, and study all sorts of religious and secular traditions. One of the notices I saw on the bulletin boards is a "sceptics" group you can attend. I'm not sure if it's through the congregation or not. But I actually thought about you when I read the pamphlet for it, because it was specifically for people who don't believe in all of the religious or new-agey claims of consumer fads or established religions.

Mmmmmmmmmm.... baaaaaaaake sales! *gurgle gurgle*

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
I'm wondering, should sceptics/secularists move to form a tighter community, something that resembles a local religious congregation where people meet not just for philisophical kinship, but for practical support of each other, and the broader community?

It seems to me us sceptics and secularists look to governments to address problems other organizations tackle hands on. Perhaps it's time we took a page from thier book, organize ourselves and find a voice in our communities.

Any thoughts?

---

I have doubts about any movemnents or organising, as they are often a reaction to an "us vs them" mentality, circling the wagons as it were. A lot of groups posit a myth that they are a beacon of light in the wilderness of a largely unlightened world. Support and social reasons for organising make sense, but not if the motivation for organising is fear, paranoia, elitism, proselytizing, and exclusive membership.

[ 12 February 2005: Message edited by: TemporalHominid ]

[ 12 February 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch:
Are there not already a lot of secular organizations for various intellectual pursuits?

---

Yes, there are. But as Surferosad points out, they mostly involve preaching to the converted, which I've never been interested in. (That's why I head for the exits, usually, during speaches at NDP and CAW functions)

And, I think sceptics/humanists/secularists have something to offer the commuity, and each other.

Like TemporalHominid, I harbour the same suspicions-- scepticism, if you will-- about organizations for the reasons pointed out.

But I've come to a time in my life where I think those dangers are outwieghed by the possible benifits, at least enough so it should be tried.

Everything in life, in my view, is an experiment.

Oh, thank you for your input.

[ 13 February 2005: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Another groups that looked interesting was the "Religious Humanists" group. I'm not sure what they mean by "religious humanists", but this is the description they give: "Religious Humanism is a philosophy of service for the greater good of all humanity based on the principles of reason, science and democracy." Which makes me wonder whether they call it "religious" simply because it's under the umbrella of a congregation, and because they consider their belief in those principles to be on the same level as a religious belief in God...

---

quote:

---

But I've come to a time in my life where I think those dangers are outwieghed by the possible benifits, at least enough so it should be tried.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch:
...The more kinds of group circle their various wagons, the longer it will take the Forces of Darkness to engulf them...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Contrarian:
Like in Gangs of New York, when they all stand there announcing their gang names before the big battle. [I just watched it again.]

---

What a terrible movie. Why would anyone want to watch it more than once?

[ 14 February 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:

Yes, there are. But as Surferosad points out, they mostly involve preaching to the converted, which I've never been interested in.

---

quote:

---

The more kinds of group circle their various wagons, the longer it will take the Forces of Darkness to engulf them (unless, of course, the FoD wipe out the lot with a single strike). And if the 'Church of Doubt' does some missionary work - like, oh, say, sending science teachers to Kansas - so much the better.

I've come to a time in my life where i stopped joining anything that requires my physical presence: the things i have to do take enough effort. (Plus, i no longer believe the human race can, or should, be saved.)

---

I'm not sure that's what I'm about. Of course, it's easy enough to conjure xenophobia on any account with this species, and that can be a major driving force for any organization, new or old. But I'd rather leave that kind of thing behind.

As an empiricist, if I was to "prostyletize" scepticism, I'd do it through evidence, and not words. Let what works speak for itself.

Like you, the things I do take enough effort. I may think I want to do something along these lines, but honestly, I don't know where I'd find the time right now. But unlike you, I have a less dim view of humanity.