Atheism isn’t just another form of religion; it’s a cheap trick to talk about atheists’ “crusades”, “dogma”, “doctrines”, and “evangelism.” These word games don’t change the fact that there’s a profound difference between evidence-based belief and faith-based belief. Wolf’s conclusion is a stunning abuse of the English language: He calls for a return to “our bedrock faith: the faith that no matter how confident we are in our beliefs, there’s always a chance we could turn out to be wrong.” That’s a great definition of skepticism, if not for the Orwellian misuse of the word “faith”! Faith is steadfast belief without evidence, the very opposite of the open-mindedness Wolf calls for.
Open-mindedness doesn’t have to mean wishy-washy intellectual limbo, and there’s nothing arrogant about taking a stand based on evidence. As Dawkins says, “undisguised clarity is easily mistaken for arrogance.” We all take positions, based on the best information we have, and act on them. Wolf’s conclusion – that he has to choose between calling himself an atheist and being respectful – is just bizarre. Skeptics don’t have to be obnoxious or shrill. The Skeptics Society takes its motto from Spinoza: “I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them.”
Herb CaudillWashington, DC
