We accept the word atheism and that's a negative word in the sense: As Sam Harris says atheism is word like non-astrologer! You just don't need it.
Although! I agree with Dawkins that sometimes its best to grasp a taboo word and I think just as although atheism is basically just like non-astrologerism is to 'astrologerism' - I agree with Dawkins that I think it is a good word to use simply because it makes some noise, rocks the boat, and is accepted despite the fact its simply a lack of belief in something rather than a belief.
I think perhaps the same could be said about the word evolutionist. The fact it causes controversy and is taboo perhaps it should also be grasped.
And the fact that the definition does not imply having irrational faith in evolution. Evolutionists believe in evolution because of the evidence. I think just as scientists believe in science because of the evidence. Not faith!
I think its simply rather irritating that belief is often thought of as faith because of religion. Not all belief is without evidence. Not all belief is faith therefore.
So I think perhaps its better to overcome and push past some of these taboo words than to avoid them. And besides theists don't make rules here.
If creationists think evolutionist or evolutionism is faith-based isn't that simply pretty similar to atheists being mistakenly equated - by some believers - to heretics or devil-worshippers? Or is that a false analogy?
Evf
EDIT: - P.S: In my Collins dictionary it defines evolutionist as: a person who believes in a theory of evolution.
So regardless of whether its a scientifically accepted theory of evolution that's believed in by whoever, - it says nothing of faith, of irrational belief.
An evolutionist is someone who believes in evolution. I believe in evolution. I don't therefore have blind irrational belief - I don't have faith. I don't have belief without evidence in evolution. There is no such implication there.
Evf
Although! I agree with Dawkins that sometimes its best to grasp a taboo word and I think just as although atheism is basically just like non-astrologerism is to 'astrologerism' - I agree with Dawkins that I think it is a good word to use simply because it makes some noise, rocks the boat, and is accepted despite the fact its simply a lack of belief in something rather than a belief.
I think perhaps the same could be said about the word evolutionist. The fact it causes controversy and is taboo perhaps it should also be grasped.
And the fact that the definition does not imply having irrational faith in evolution. Evolutionists believe in evolution because of the evidence. I think just as scientists believe in science because of the evidence. Not faith!
I think its simply rather irritating that belief is often thought of as faith because of religion. Not all belief is without evidence. Not all belief is faith therefore.
So I think perhaps its better to overcome and push past some of these taboo words than to avoid them. And besides theists don't make rules here.
If creationists think evolutionist or evolutionism is faith-based isn't that simply pretty similar to atheists being mistakenly equated - by some believers - to heretics or devil-worshippers? Or is that a false analogy?
Evf
EDIT: - P.S: In my Collins dictionary it defines evolutionist as: a person who believes in a theory of evolution.
So regardless of whether its a scientifically accepted theory of evolution that's believed in by whoever, - it says nothing of faith, of irrational belief.
An evolutionist is someone who believes in evolution. I believe in evolution. I don't therefore have blind irrational belief - I don't have faith. I don't have belief without evidence in evolution. There is no such implication there.
Evf
