Over in yon thread, a discussion has evolved on what icon makes for the best representation if atheism.
The stylized atom is being offered by some, but that just doesn’t seem right to me because it leans more strongly towards science than atheism.
One poster offers up this justification:
I suggested the Darwin Fish and the Vitruvian Man, neither of which I consider perfect but they both have a strong implication of naturalism and I prefer them both over the atom.
So I guess we need a poll. Is the atom really “established and well known”? Maybe I just don’t get out enough. What would be the ideal symbol for athiesm? Preferably something that has no strong tie-ins to other “isms”.
I’d say Vitruvian Man would be better for self-styled Humanists, although if you had to have an umbrella icon for Humanists, Atheists, and Agnostics I would pick that one.
ETA: it would still be better than an atom, which conjures up an image of some sort of Church of the Mad Scientist.
I agree. When I see that, it doesn’t occur to me to think of atheism, just science.
Bad idea, for two reasons. #1, it already symbolizes Darwinian evolution. You can’t also use it for atheism without equating the two. (Some people do equate atheism and Darwinism, resulting in needless strife and confusion.) #2, the Darwin fish is a parody of Christian Ichthus. To adopt it as an atheist icon is to portray atheism as a reaction to Christianity. (True, to some atheists their atheism is mainly about rejecting (what they perceive to be) Christianity, but I don’t think that’s the essence of atheism per se.)
I should note that the one currently being used is not the one featured in the OP of this or the other tread. Right now I’m using this one, from Wikipedia, since it’s somewhat better-looking than the others.
Even though I’m not absolutely in love with this atom symbol representing atheism, since it seems to be widely-used I think we should stick with it. Yes, people won’t know what it means at first, but once they figure it out, the symbol will be that much more recognized.
Trying to come up with an image that somehow just SCREAMS “atheist” seems to be futile, short of just making an image of the word “atheist.”
I have a compromise, as a strict answer to the Subject Line of the OP. I guess we could have an atom as a symbol of complete athiests, and then have Petruvian man as a symbol for people who are just sort of athy.
Hmmm…well, most religious people have few or no troubles with Darwin (learned all about him in Catholic school 20 years ago). The atom does make me think of science and again, I think you can find physicists being trained at Fordham and Georgetown to so it wouldn’t make me think of athiesm, just science in general.
As for the “A’s”, it just makes me think of the giant anarchist ones painted on the back of Rick’s (or was it Vyvyan’s?) jacket in THE YOUNG ONES. I would find impossible to take anyone who used it seriously even if they were under the symbol in their actual graves.
The empty symbol set? I dunno, I think it would fit into the stereotype of athiests as joyless, despairing angst-ridden people who see no meaning in life, just a long void until death. Which doesn’t fit any of the athiests I know at all.
The stylized atom looks a lot like the symbol that the library used to use to denote science fiction when I was a kid. I have nothing against it, as a symbol, in fact I’m rather fond of it, but I don’t think it’s the best choice. The Darwin Fish is a reaction to the Christian Fish symbol. Not all atheists are former Christians, nor do all atheists feel that they are diametrically opposed to some or all Christianity. The Darwin Fish is a specific reaction to creationists, in my opinion, not a true symbol of atheism. It’s possible to be religious and to also understand that evolution is a fact. As for the Vitruvian Man, it’s a MAN, not a human. No, a man is not a generic human, it’s specifically one sex, especially if there’s genitalia shown. I would accept this as a symbol for humanists if it were desexed. The empty set symbol does convey the basic idea of atheism (the idea that there are no gods), but it seems sort of…negative. Of the rest of the symbols, I rather like the script scarlet letter A, both because it echoes adultery (and is therefore somewhat naughty today) and because the old reason given to kids who asked about the Scarlet Letter was that it stood for Adult. I also rather like the A with the infinity symbol as the crossbar.
I have the invisible pink unicorn emblem on my car.
I like it.
I haven’t been shouted at, and my car has not been keyed–compare that to my experience in San Diego, when a campaign sticker for Chris Kehoe (which used the rainbow flag background) was on my truck for no more than a half hour before being keyed–so I suppose that might mean as a symbol of atheism it is not terribly effective. Or something else. But I like it. The emblem is just fake chrome, not pink, and I bought it at evolvefish.
In my experience (as an agnostic) atheists and agnostics can generally be lumped into 2 groups.
Intelligent, introspective, thoughtful people who like to evaluate and understand everything and on the issue of religion, have examined the evidence and found nothing there but found issues like evolution to be far more rational. The vast majority of college professors would fit in this group.
Assholes and bitter people.
The symbol should represent the first group. It should represent introspection, logic, and the knowledge that because there is no higher power, we are our brother’s keeper.
I think a hollow cube with something in the middle would be nice, but have no idea what to put in the middle.
