Am I a Fake Atheist?

Atheists often say Jesus was a myth.

Occasionally, some of my fellow atheists accuse me of being fake. Sometimes they say I’m a Christian going undercover and trying to undermine atheism from within. To one guy, I’m a wannabe Christian, which at least is a little more imaginative. Or I’m a fake atheist, whatever that means. It feels weird to have someone from the tribe declare me an outcast, but I try not to take it personally. It’s just what I deserve for flouting tribal boundaries. 

Online and at atheist gatherings, I’m likely to challenge atheists when their criticisms of religion are unfair. For example, saying that there’s no evidence for a historical Jesus is a flat-out error. Identifying religion with mental illness is another popular misconception. It’s natural to be unfair to the “enemy camp,” so errors like these are common. In terms of tribal politics, my criticizing a fellow atheist’s attack on religion is tantamount to treason. It’s just the sort of thing that gets you cast out of the tribe. But I’m not really defending the “enemy.” It’s not religion that I’m trying to protect. I'm trying to protect atheism—our secular community, such that it is. Humans in any group are prone to think negatively and speak unfairly about “enemy” groups. In fact, people generally love to hate the “other,” as everyone generating propaganda knows. Atheists are no different. The humanity we share with the believers makes us more like them than different from them. It’s no surprise to see us atheists engaging in the same simplistic, us-versus-them rhetoric that we accuse believers of indulging in. 

So does that mean I’m wasting my time, fighting human nature like this? Sometimes it feels like I am. But it’s not healthy to build a community around negativity, and I have reasons to hope that atheism can lose some of this bias. Why should I hope? 

• We atheists pride ourselves on being evidence-driven. Even though this principle is often neglected, it’s still an ideal that I can appeal to. We atheists humbly acknowledge that our evolved minds sometimes trick us into seeing things that aren’t there and believing things that aren’t true. 
• Young atheists from secular homes don’t necessarily have the same chips on their shoulders that so many of us older atheists do. 
• A number of atheist writers, such as Alain de Botton, have pointed out that there’s more to religion than oppression. 
• As for human nature, if it is our nature to be tribalistic, it is also our nature to be adaptable. Western civilization has made great progress in terms of self-awareness and broad-mindedness. 

All these factors give me hope, and I’ll keep expecting reasonableness from my fellow atheists. At least until they take my atheist card away and kick me out of the tribe for real. 

More Posts About Atheism

Walk-n-Talk Discussions

Walk & Talk at Burning Man

How do you get a large number of people to share their opinions in meaningful discussions? An open discussion seems to be something of an ideal among atheists, perhaps because we lean toward analysis and individualism. The first problem with open discussions of any size is that they are too easily dominated by extraverts. If someone gets angry over a sensitive topic, they also take more than their share of the spotlight. Usually, a few people do most of the talking. I’ve organized and participated in a lot of discussions over the years, and I want better results than that. Particularly if you’re concerned with empowering women’s voices, the issue is salient because on average it’s men who do most of the overtalking. Part of the problem is with extraverts, especially the loudmouths who feel compelled to talk and often talk over others. Don’t judge them too harshly. Everyone’s different, and some people are different by being more of a loudmouth. There’s another reason, however, that we don’t hear from some people. Speaking up in front of a big group is scary for a lot of people. And honestly it’s a big responsibility, taking the spotlight and asking a large group of people to listen to you instead of saying what they have to say. Plenty of people don’t even want to take their share of the air time. They have things to say, often some really insightful things, but they’re comfortable speaking in smaller groups, not big ones. How do you even things out, so that loudmouths can’t shut people out, and so shy people can contribute to a discussion without being forced to take the stage? My proposal is to run the discussion as a “walk-n-talk.” It’s an event that I’ve run several times at Burning Man, game conventions and Unitarian Sunday school. Instead of sitting, the participants stand in an open space and they all share their opinions on a question by walking to one side of the room or the other. A moderator leads a more or less regular discussion, except that each participant also gets to “voice” their opinion without taking the spotlight and in a way that can’t be talked over.

Here’s an example of the walk-n-talk format working. One year we had a quiet 7th grader in Sunday school. She paid attention in our discussions but she never spoke up. Near the end of the school year, we did a walk-n-talk, and for one question she walked way to left, as far as she could get. I asked her why she felt so strongly, and she explained her perspective to the class. It was easier for her to finally say something because she the walk-n-talk format allowed her to first voice an opinion without commanding others’ attention or even talking. We can encourage shy kids to speak up in class, but context counts more than words. 

Here’s my boilerplate description of the event for game conventions.

Walk & Talk
Stand and be counted with your people! Everyone stands in a group. The leader presents the group with either/or choices such as, “If you like pirates better than ninjas, move left. If you like ninjas better than pirates, move right.” Everybody gets to see how everyone else in the group answers each question. After each question, we talk briefly, and people on either side can explain their choices.  Then we move on to new questions. The questions cover whatever topics would be appropriate to the event. Participants can also pose questions to the group. Originally a Burning Man event.
   
Requires an open space where a dozen people or more can walk back and forth. Good for a high-traffic area because people can drop in at any time. Works best at 50 - 90 minutes.

Instructions for Moderators
If you have a feel for moderating the process, no instructions are really necessary, but here is the process spelled out. If you’re not moderating, these instructions still work as “the rules.”

1. You, the moderator, stand on the centerline of the room or area, dividing it into left and right. You stand at the edge of the play area. The participants gather into a mob in front of you, in the center of the play area.

2. Explain that this is a safe place for a conversation where people can disagree without criticizing someone else’s feelings or questioning their experiences.

3. The moderator poses a two-answer question to the group, such as, “Which do you like more, dogs or cats? If you like dogs more, move over that way.” Point right. “And if you like cats more, move that way.” Point left. “If you like them equally, stand on the center line.” Indicate the halfway line across the area, the imaginary line directly in front of you.
    

4. Participants move to one side or the other, often groaning at the difficulty of the decision.
    

5. You elicit a conversation on the topic. Call on people on each side. Encourage them to try to explain their viewpoints and possibly convince people in the middle. People can change position as they see fit.
    

6. Keep the conversations short. When they get too long, tell everyone to get back in the middle for the next question. You can often do new questions inspired by the discussion.
    

7. For some questions, you will want people moving not just left and right but up and back. For the cat and dog question, for example, you can add a new dimension to differentiate city people from country people. Once people are divided into right and left for dogs and cats, have them move forward (toward you) if they’re city people and back if they’re country people. Are there correlations? Do urban dog-lovers love different sorts of dogs from rural dog-lovers?
    

8. Start with safe topics, like movies or food. Gradually you can get to more personal issues, such as personal life.
 

9. My events are usually 50 to 90 minutes.
 

10. In a public venue with an open invitation, it’s nice to position the players so that you are facing the entrance, and it’s behind the players. That way new players can unobtrusively join in the back. They can also slip away if they like.

Advice for a Burning Man Walk-n-Talk 

For anyone who want to know more, here is a link to a document that I wrote to coach a friend the first time he was running the event.

Guidelines

Verbatim Notes from Gamefest

Here are the notes I prepared for the last walk-n-talk I did at Gamefest in Denver. The topic was gamer identity, an easy catch-all topic. As you will see, the notes are highly sketchy, really just reminders for me to refer to quickly when I need a new topic.

Verbatim Notes

Availability
If you want me to run a walk-n-talk at your event, email me: jt at jonathantweet dot com.