Afaeism

“Afaeism” is a word I’ve used before on Twitter, Facebook, and blog comment threads, but it really deserves a post of its own so I can link people to it as needed. “Afaeism” is a word I’ve coined to mean disbelief in fairies.

The reason for coining “afaeism” is simple: so that whenever you see a believer saying something about atheism, you can mentally replace “atheism” with “afaeism.” If the new statement makes just as much logical sense as the original, you know the original was pretty stupid.

  • http://www.skepticink.com/humesapprentice Ryan

    How are we to pronounce this? Ay-Fee-ism or Ah-Fay-ism?

    • Chris Hallquist

      I’ve been pronouncing it the second way in my head, but I guess you could pronounce it the first way too.

  • JohnH

    As in:
    afaeists can’t have objective morality?

    Personally I don’t see how afaeists can have gravity as everyone clearly knows that it is tiny invisible fairies that are attached to all objects that attempt to come together in order to copulate which causes gravity. Take away the fairies and there would be no gravity, everything would just float off into space.

  • Ophis

    I don’t think it’s as universally applicable as you seem to be suggesting in your post, since the idea of God(s) is used as an explanation in cases where fairies are not and could not be used. The theist claim that they have a better account of the origin of the universe than atheists, for example, has a coherence that an equivalent faeist(?) claim would not. I can at least can understand what theists are claiming, because the qualities of gods in theist mythologies are compatible with gods creating a universe. The qualities of fairies in fairy stories don’t allow them to create a universe, so replacing gods with fairies in the theist claim merely makes it unintelligible, even to believers in fairies.

    In short, the mythologies are just too different for this kind of switching to work reliably. Swapping Jehovah for Zeus would be more sensible, but wouldn’t make much difference since the theist arguments you refer to are generally used to support theism in general, rather than one religion in particular.

    • Andyman409

      Just re-read this part, and you’ll find your question miraculously answered:

      “if someone says something about atheism, you can mentally replace “atheism” with “afaeism.” *IF* the new
      statement makes just as much logical sense as the original, you know the original was pretty stupid.”

      I thonk chris has the more ridiculous statements in mind, like the ones concerning tides going in.

    • hf

      Actually, I don’t think a Creator who likes/liked sacrifices performed by Levite priests of the right ancestry has any real advantage over a Creator who likes milk.

      The general form of theism – well, I’d mention the Simulation Argument here, but that argument makes it transparently stupid to declare your belief in intelligent creators. They might get nervous and turn us off. ^_^

      I will say that the assumption of a human-like mind contains a lot of assumptions, possibly even more than liking milk does, and still does not give us a mechanism for the act of creation.

  • Pingback: yellow october


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X