News3 mins ago
The atheists are advertising
32 Answers
Slogan - 'There's probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life'.
Money well spent, or a waste of time?
http://www.justgiving.com/atheistbus
Money well spent, or a waste of time?
http://www.justgiving.com/atheistbus
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ludwig. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As a positive atheist I'd like to answer a couple of points:
1. 'Probable' does not depict any moral uncertainty: it is a perfectly correct scientific convention. Unlike religion which rests purely on immutable dogma, all scientific principles, however well and long established, are provisional, accepted unless and until a better or conflicting theory comes along.
Thus it is right to say 'Electricity probably comprises a flow of electrons' and 'The earth probably orbits the sun'. And negatively, 'Santa Claus probably doesn't exist' and 'There are probably no fairies at the bottom of my garden'.
Similarly 'There is probably no God' is correct, even to someone who has no doubts about the matter.
2. I agree with naomi that neither atheists nor believers will be moved by these ads. But there are a lot of closet atheists out there who are only just beginning to realise that atheism is now socially acceptable; they won't be tortured, burnt at the stake or treated as pariahs any more. They are now 'coming out' as homosexuals have done in recent years. These ads, providing they don't go on long enough to become irritating, will be an encouragement to them, and, at long last, the imbalance that has existed for millennia will start that long haul towards balance.
What can be wrong with advertising truth after so many years of falsehood from the Church?
1. 'Probable' does not depict any moral uncertainty: it is a perfectly correct scientific convention. Unlike religion which rests purely on immutable dogma, all scientific principles, however well and long established, are provisional, accepted unless and until a better or conflicting theory comes along.
Thus it is right to say 'Electricity probably comprises a flow of electrons' and 'The earth probably orbits the sun'. And negatively, 'Santa Claus probably doesn't exist' and 'There are probably no fairies at the bottom of my garden'.
Similarly 'There is probably no God' is correct, even to someone who has no doubts about the matter.
2. I agree with naomi that neither atheists nor believers will be moved by these ads. But there are a lot of closet atheists out there who are only just beginning to realise that atheism is now socially acceptable; they won't be tortured, burnt at the stake or treated as pariahs any more. They are now 'coming out' as homosexuals have done in recent years. These ads, providing they don't go on long enough to become irritating, will be an encouragement to them, and, at long last, the imbalance that has existed for millennia will start that long haul towards balance.
What can be wrong with advertising truth after so many years of falsehood from the Church?
If you knew more of the work of Richard Dawkins, a prime mover in this ad campaign, you would know that he has always gone to enormous pains, as a scientist, to emphasise the importance of that 'probably'.
The CAP argument is trivial. As I have said many times before it is not for rational people to disprove the claims of the irrational. Would an advert saying 'There are probably no fairies' - part of the promotion of a film, for example - be banned on the grounds that it cannot be proved? Come on.
And think on this: the claim on the bus is a reasonable one. The adverts outside churches that say 'Jesus lives', 'God made the world', 'Come and receive life everlasting' cannot be proved either and are very unreasonable. When was the last time a church was subjected to the Code?
Anyway, my aim was not to persuade anyone of anything, merely to explain. If you don't like the explanation, then you don't have to accept it.
The CAP argument is trivial. As I have said many times before it is not for rational people to disprove the claims of the irrational. Would an advert saying 'There are probably no fairies' - part of the promotion of a film, for example - be banned on the grounds that it cannot be proved? Come on.
And think on this: the claim on the bus is a reasonable one. The adverts outside churches that say 'Jesus lives', 'God made the world', 'Come and receive life everlasting' cannot be proved either and are very unreasonable. When was the last time a church was subjected to the Code?
Anyway, my aim was not to persuade anyone of anything, merely to explain. If you don't like the explanation, then you don't have to accept it.
Yeah, well that�s all very nice and stuff, but if my local Church came to me and said that they wanted to plaster loads of adverts over a route master in London and they needed my cash to do it, I would decline and say I preferred the money was spent on 3rd world missions or the local children�s hospice or something.
Whilst I think atheists have every right to project their non-beliefs - or whatever you wish to call it - giving money to an ad agency doesn�t do much to promote the humanitarian nature of many of them, it shows them to be just as gullible as they think the religionists are ....maybe��.?
Whilst I think atheists have every right to project their non-beliefs - or whatever you wish to call it - giving money to an ad agency doesn�t do much to promote the humanitarian nature of many of them, it shows them to be just as gullible as they think the religionists are ....maybe��.?
I think the point is not whether there is a God but rather that can his representatives, the clergy , prove that what they preach is correct. Let me take a basic belief of most religions, the power of prayer. I can positively say I have never had a prayer answered, not since as a small child, and no one is more innocent or sincere than a a small child. Some would say that I need others to pray for me , well how many ? One billion prayers were offered up for the safe return of Madeline McCaine and over a year later there is not even a clue of her whereabouts. I've no doubt that if she was found tomorrow or in 20 years time the believers would still claim their prayers were answered.
