http://www.religionnews.com/2013/10/21/ ... e-atheist/
A response by David Noise, a humanist:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/our ... ts-so-much
Unfair prejudice is most shocking not when it comes from expected sources—a KKK leader, for example, or a skinhead—but when it comes from a respected mainstream spokesperson who supposedly reflects enlightened contemporary values. Thus, brace yourself for Oprah Winfrey, as she disparages millions of atheists by telling her audience that, in her opinioin, atheists are incapable of awe.
She is chatting with endurance swimmer Diana Nyad, who recently swam from Cuba to Florida at age 64. Nyad unhesitatingly identifies as an atheist when asked about her beliefs, then adds that she sees no contradiction between her atheism and her ability to experience awe, or in her words to “weep with the beauty of this universe and be moved by all of humanity.''
Oprah, however, apparently found this description unsettling, for it seems that in her view atheists must be cold, emotionless rationalists. “Well I don’t call you an atheist then,” Oprah responded to Nyad's disclosure. “I think if you believe in the awe and the wonder and the mystery, then that is what God is.”
Response by David Lose, author of 'Making Sense of Scripture'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-los ... 50502.html
[emphasis added]
'Some things ar ultimately beyond proof': isn't this where all philosophy of religion leads.[There are] profound and important challenges of living in our increasingly pluralistic world. Can we genuinely respect those whose worldview seems utterly irreconcilable to our own?
... what if we reclaimed a sense that belief in God -- or, for that matter, disbelief in God -- is less a matter of proof than it is confession: a willingness to give one's good reasons and evidence for one's views but also to surrender a claim to final proof. In this approach to articulating views, the boldness of a well-reasoned conviction is also and always accompanied by a commensurate acceptance that some things are ultimately beyond proof.
...had Oprah simply valued and identified with Diana Nyad's expression of awe and wonder at the world instead of reducing it to a slightly different but essentially similar expression of faith as her own, then the conversation might have moved on to how they could work together to save this precious world that elicits wonder from one and belief from another.
To move in this direction, however, requires the capacity to live with ambiguity, and such a commodity seems strikingly rare of late. We live in a culture that prefers black and white clarity to the grey hues of ambiguity. We value certainty over discernment, absolute knowledge over tentative belief, and the illusion of stability that dogmatism (of the religious and non-religious types) offers in response to the perceived threat of chaos some fear ambiguity portends.
If we think it is important for humanity to get to grips with the fall-out from religious or non-religious leaders; black and white thinking and dogmatism from any quarter - then how do we move forward...
Philosophy as a worldview - defined by academics
