Universal interfaith symbol

I cannot speak for the other skeptics here but I think that most of
us would be very (… well not angry, less than that… miffed?) at
being included in a pantheistic symbol. Our whole point is that we do
not have a theology!

I’m reminded that evil men will always do evil - but that it takes
theology to make a good man do evil.

Whist I do buy into the “roses and light” and all the good feelings
going on here I’m going to commit an atrocity here and now.

In the light of all the coming out these days perhaps
the best symbol would be a weeping child.

I’m genuinely sorry to be so “down” - but I think that faith and
belief do that very thing, cause good people to do evil!

Tony Konrath
Key West Florida 33040

I know I have to be careful, because it’s very easy to hurt people
in talking about this subject… but I’ll take that risk.

Believe in myself?

No - I trust myself and I trust you as a companion in this
enterprise of exchanging I accept you for who you say
you are.

The whole point in being a skeptic is that you can give up belief.
Faith and belief are replaced with trust and knowledge.

I can trust a persons knowledge and so accept what they say. That, I
think , is responsible way of managing the world. For example “I
understand that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. He seems to be a
trustworthy person so I’ll accept what he says. But reserve just a
little bit back in case I’m wrong about him”

Faith and belief are so “wussy!” They beg questions, take the easy
way out. I’ve been with my partner over twenty five years. Do I tell
him “I have faith in you - I believe in you?” No, I say “I know you
and I trust you.”

Notice in your posting you keep telling me what I think…

“But Tony, you do believe in yourself.”

“As an atheist, you believe your inspiration comes from within
yourself.”

“I know you believe in John Burgess.”

No, no and no!

It’s so much simpler to know myself, to understand where my
inspiration comes from - even partially understand, and I don’t know
John Burgess - so how could I possibly trust him (sorry John!)

Tony Konrath
Key West Florida 33040

Daniel’s response gets responded to…

I’m never happy about being defined by a dictionary - just look at
Ambrose Bierce’s!

An atheist is someone who regard themselves as not having a theology

  • there is no need to explain our experiences by referring to
    supernatural agencies or beings.

An agnostic admit to having no knowledge about supernatural "events’
or beings.

You can be both at the some time.

Generally “skeptic” is replacing these two words.

Even worse (this is embarrassingly awful…) some of us skeptics are
claiming the word “Bright.”

“Do you go to church?” “No, I’m Bright”

And whilst , just as all gay people are not actually “gay” - so, not
all brights are actually “bright” - but I’d be very surprised to find
one!

Tony Konrath
Key West Florida 33040

Hello Orchidians, I like John Burgess’s idea of the Mobius strip. I
make Mobius rings - one side textured, the other polished. People
are fascinated and the concept of a never-ending structure has all
kinds of meaning. Now I’m going to make another Mobius strip ring
just for me, with Orchid in mind. I’ll wear it to Tucson; see you
there!! Judy in Kansas

Judy M. Willingham, R.S.
B.A.E. 237 Seaton Hall
Kansas State University
Manhatttan KS 66506
(785) 532-2936 FAX (785) 532-6944

I agree with Dale that a butterfly is already in use, and therefore
tough to “take over”. And I, also, am drawn to the use of a circle
containing or with something. For this project to actually work in
the real world, I am convinced that we have to come up with something
new, or at least not in current use, and pretty simple. It needs to
be something we can work with in our many, diverse styles. Think of
the Nike “swoop”. It might very well be the most universally
recognized symbol in the world. It doesn’t mean anything-- except
that now it does. The symbols.com site someone posted a day or two
ago is full of wonderful little dingbats that have little or no
current meaning to anyone. The sign at
http://www.symbols.com/encyclopedia/02/0223.html if turned 90
degrees, is an abstract butterfly and is made of spirals, a perrenial
favorite symbol – that could work. I also really like
http://www.symbols.com/encyclopedia/42/425.html which suggests a
sunrise and contains a circle. In any case, this site is, to me
anyway, a lot of fun. Man, you can find anything on the web-- the
tough part is to think to look for it!

–No?

    I do like the idea of the circle with something inside of it,
perhaps a flower.  How about two interwoven circles with a lotus,
or maybe an orchid (or an abstraction of an orchid) inside? 

I’ve been following this thread with great interest, and considering
not only what kind of image would be resonant with all religions, but
would also instill or inspire that emotion which religion brings out
in people. That feeling is compassion. I believe compassion is the
single most important and lacking state of consciousness in people
all over the world. As a Buddhist, my primary motivation is
compassion toward all sentient beings, and I think any universal
image should inspire compassion in its viewers or wearers. Can you
imagine a world in which everyone is compassionate toward each
other? It would truly be Heaven on Earth.

I do like the winged heart image, but how about a winged lotus
partially within a circle? At the very least it would cause one to
think… I do have a particular symbol though, that of the sun, which
is eventually explained in the following.

Whatever else it may do, the image should be designed to elicit
feelings of oneness, of unity in diversity, and of course compassion.

To carry this a little further, what is religion exactly?

The dictionary states

  1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers
    regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

  2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief
    and worship. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

  3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of
    a spiritual leader.

  4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or
    conscientious devotion.

As an extremely practical person, I logically dismiss the
“supernatural” although I do not deny it. It just doesn’t connect
with agnostics, atheists, and the like. Of the 4 definitions given, I
am most attracted to #3. The word Spiritual needs definition now.

  1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit;
    not tangible or material.

  2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.

  3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific.

  4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.

  5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit;
    supernatural.

I think ‘Spiritual’ is getting closer to the point, but it still
does not include what religion basically teaches, which is compassion
and tolerance among other practices leading to the “fruits of the
spirit”.

While I’m at it, here’s the definition of compassion:

Deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to
relieve it.

When we think of a spiritual leader, I’d guess that this is the
basic assumption we make, that this leader can relieve us of our
suffering, whether it be emotional, or otherwise. When we pray, what
do we pray for? We pray for some Divine being to give something to
us, be it relief from pain, from poverty, and so on. In short, we
expect the spiritual being to be one who gives constantly and never
receives back, something like the Sun which makes life possible on
this earth. We humans, like the earth, are usually wanting and
receiving, whereas we could more like the sun and constantly giving.
Do you know someone like that, someone who is more like the sun than
the earth?

This is leading up to the symbol I like, the image of the sun.

Maybe the sun could be combined with other imagery. Radiant sun with
a lotus superimposed over it? I’ll keep thinking about it and
eventually post an image(s) somewhere and send links.

Jeffrey Everett

Hi, Daniel, Please forgive me, but I think you’re missing the point.
Faith, yes. In a higher “being”, not so much. As I said earlier, that
would make me an atheist, but I am very much a person of faith. I
think it was Enrico Fermi (I know it was a famous physicist) who was
asked how, believing so strongly in the ability of the intellect and
the immutability of natural law (physics), he could still make such a
habit of prayer. His answer was “because I’d be a damned fool if I
didn’t”. I don’t believe we’re talking about an “interfaith” symbol,
as in religion, but a “faith” and unity symbol, with religion
completely at the discretion of the individual, and definately
optional. Of course, many feel no need for such a symbol, because
they don’t have faith, or because they are satisfied with the
vocabulary of symbols they already know. That’s OK! But clearly there
are those who feel an urgent need for a way to remind any who care to
listen that there is no “us” and “them”, there is only “us”.

–No?

Isn’t the universal interfaith symbol 4 hands of all colors holding
each other? After all we are all in this together…Ringman John Henry

    A universal interfaith symbol, by definition will not include
atheists. They have no faith in a higher being at all. 

Atheists can have “higher powers” consisting of ideals or reason.
This makes them no less “spiritual beings”.

I have to wonder what an “interfaith” symbol would symbolize.
Wishful thinking? Does anyone have an idea?

Bruce D. Holmgrain
JA Certified Master Bench Jeweler
http://www.goldwerx.com

Is it possible that faith, which we are treating as the defining
characteristic of religion, is really more characteristic of western
thought and culture? Western religion tends to stress salvation
through the embrace of certain concepts, beliefs, or dogmas, and
puts heavy emphasis on the word, written or otherwise. This may not
be characteristic of all religions. In the Zen Buddhist tradition,
for example, one is exhorted not to have faith, but rather to have
doubt, to keep a “beginner’s mind,” or to “just don’t know.”

Lee Einer
Dos Manos Jewelry
http://www.dosmanosjewelry.com

    Isn't the universal interfaith symbol 4 hands of all colors
holding each other? After all  we are all in this
together.....Ringman John Henry 

John: that is also the logo of the Pagan Business Group, Rather like
the square trade organization,

Kenneth Ferrell

Hello All, The suggestion of a child is a good one. How about a
child in a manger? Merry Christmas to all. John

       I like John Burgess's idea of the Mobius strip.I make
Mobius rings - one side textured, the other polished.  

My vote also goes to John Burgess’ idea; but Judy, i can’t help
being curious: how can you polish one side and texture the other side
of a Moebius strip? I thought that the whole idea was that the
Moebius strip only has one side :slight_smile: Niels

Defining Atheism of course is far more complex than the dictionary
would define. Some atheists are now calling for the term “brights” to
be their handle. The advocate/atheist might object to our symbol just
because it does imply a higher power at work in our lives. This is
the sort of advocate who objects to any public reference to God. Not
my cup of tea, but I understand the point. The line from atheist to
agnostic blurs as we respond to this thread. Anyway, my favorite
concept seen here so far is the child or infant, and the infinity
symbol, i.e. the mobius strip. Put a child in or seated on that
symbol? I would wear that! Heck I would volunteer the metal and the
casting work.

If we get a consensus, may I suggest we copyright this the way DPS
did the right hand rings. Copyright and license freely, just so no
one person can “own” the design. Copyrighted to the public so to
speak.

Daniel Ballard

About atheists as “brights” I saw this in a recent Scientific
American issue. Let me say I am not endorsing either the term or the
Webster definition. Each group has some latitude to define their
label… The “brights” label advocate pointed out how “gay” now
means homosexual rather than cheerful or happy as a state of mind.
Again not my term, but interesting in a cultural way…

Daniel Ballard

What follows is a quote from Cliff Walker, editor of the Positive
Atheism website and magazine (www.positiveatheism.org):

  "...atheism is not a positive belief in an object (such as God
  or Christ) but is what philosophers call a negative belief: we
  don't believe in a specific object (gods). The word atheist is
  a word we use to distinguish ourselves from people who do
  believe in gods. 

So, my atheism is not an added attraction in my life. Some might
say, Well, I’ve been a theist all my life and this is certainly
something new for me. Granted, but what happened is that you removed
an added attraction that you once had: atheism, as religious beliefs
go, is the default human condition.

So, the question I have is why would we want to symbolize an
absence? In other words, what is there, even, to symbolize?"

okay, how about a circle with a spot(on a smudge) in the middle?

it seems that everything in life is a substitute for a nipple. (that
being the first pleasure/comfort/relief after the trauma of
childbirth following the insulated environment in which we exist
without knowing hunger/cold/etc etc…

hence the nipple really is the first universal symbol, and
represents our common desire for comfort and/or relief.

my .02, april, de-tech studio

Okay, I have read a bunch more responses and it is time to chime in
again. Perhaps we are spending too much time worrying about this
outward symbol and not enough worrying about the underlying mindset.
If we would put this energy toward doing right in the world, we might
get somewhere eventually. I have a similar thought when I’m in
church. I like going at some points in my life, especially around
Christmas, but often I wonder if we aren’t mostly wasting time. If
everyone in our church on a given Sunday morning would instead go out
to the local Habitat for Humanity site, for instance, think how many
more houses could be built. If all of the time spent in churches
around the world were actually devoted to doing something rather
than talking about it, many of the world’s problems might be better
under control. Likewise, if all of the time we are spending on this
thread were devoted to working in a soup kitchen, volunteering at a
children’s hospital, etc, think of the results. Now I’ll climb down

<snip>  So, the question I have is why would we want to symbolize
an absence? In other words, what is there, even, to symbolize?

I understood the original idea was to determine a universally
recognizable symbol that would emphasize the connectedness of all
mankind. In my opinion the “interfaith” tag was used in an effort
to point out that an appropriate symbol would not also be identified
with any specific religion or belief / non-belief position.

While this doesn’t make the quest any less difficult it might
diminish some of the uneasiness caused by assigning labels to groups
of people. Identifying and labeling differences seems counter to the
express intention here.

Thank you all. By way of this interesting thread I more clearly
observe that our differences do not make us unrelated.

Pam Chott
Song of the Phoenix

Hello Niels and a question for Peter Rowe,

Re your question: “How can you polish one side and texture the other
side of a Moebius strip? I thought that the whole idea was that the
Moebius strip only has one side :slight_smile: Niels”

You start with a flat strip, texture one side and polish the other.
Then, when soldering, twist the ends so that the butt of the
polished side is soldered to the butt of the textured side. The
joint becomes the bottom of the shank. The twist is on top of the
finger. I’ve only done it with sterling.

Peter, I want to make my personal ring with gold on one side and
silver on the other, probably texturing the silver. Any advice? I
know annealing will be very important as the strip is very stiff.
Will the expantion of the two metals be the problem it is with gold
and platinum???

Isn’t this a wonderful forum. A special holiday thanks to Hanuman
and Ton. So looking forward to seeing you again in Tucson. Judy in
Kansas

Judy M. Willingham, R.S.
B.A.E. 237 Seaton Hall
Kansas State University
Manhatttan KS 66506
(785) 532-2936 FAX (785) 532-6944