I am always vaguely bothered by how religious people frame the argument of belief. In essence, they are ‘believers’ and I am a ‘non-believer’ or an ‘unbeliever’ or I ‘don’t believe’. They are ‘theist’, I am ‘atheist’. Except, I don’t see it that way. Why is the term that describes me the antithesis to the term that describes them? Now, I don’t go the route of some atheists and say that believers are ‘delusional’ and I am ‘rational’, but I see the point of re-framing the argument, of taking it back for us, the ‘non-believing’ community. It is partly because neither term fits: I do believe in things that aren’t real, like love and democracy, so I am not strictly speaking a non-believer. And it isn’t that I have moved away from god(s); there weren’t any to begin with. Onward!
- ‘Life in the United Kingdom’, a Criticism: Part 2
- ‘Life in the United Kingdom’, a Criticism: Part 1
- Wordgames – Why ‘belief’ and ‘non-belief’ are not true opposites
- Which are you? Liberator or oppressor?
- Comparative Contexts: From Stars, to Humans, to Faith
- A Tale of Two Catholicisms
- How to Survive a PhD
- Fwuzzerip, a ‘proof’ of Faith
- The Tedium of Skyrim
- Reflections on St Patrick’s Day
Divisions of Endeavours
A Frivolous Endeavour by David Burke is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.