A scheme with a future, maybe.

[Era]

Documentary: Who Are the Faithless: Atheism in America. (http://www.minervamedia.net/prospectus.htm)
What is your opinion? Comments will be appreciated.

Regards,

Era

[Eudaimonist]

Notably absent are Ayn Rand, Objectivist groups such as The Objectivist Center, and the Fellowship of Reason, which all have a bearing on atheism and the possibility of a secular morality.

[Richard1366]

Don't forget Lance Armstrong in your list of atheist notables..

[DougP]

Documentary: Who Are the Faithless: Atheism in America. (http://www.minervamedia.net/prospectus.htm)
What is your opinion? Comments will be appreciated.

Regards,

Era


I would very much like to see this documentary!

[capsaicin67]

I have toyed with this idea, too, and thus I think it worth pursuing.

-Would you intend it to be of a style and quality that you think would fly at Film Festivals [do you plan to exhibit it there and do you think it possible to do so?] If not, what do you expect it's venue to be?

-Since you are soliciting feedback, I think that maybe the term "faithless" in the title might be strategically not optimal. I think it too loaded, personally. You want as many people as possible to "come inside" and see the film. I'd go with "Freethought in America" or Liberty of Conscience: America's Freethought Heritage, or something along those lines. Something with even more pizazz than that would be even better, but I'm shooting from the hip....

-In your interviews with the faithful, I would try to present a snippet from both, say, a Republican that has a small pov, and maybe a more progressive one [if such an animal exists], otherwise I think it would seem a bit skewed and prone to cheapshot stereotyping which will make moderates perhaps a bit squirmy? I think the inclusion of those within collectives or categories that are thought to be anti-atheistic will also have credibility for those on the fence and will be persuasive or unsettling, and make the possiblilty of acceptance or tolerance all the more obvious or likely.

-Sounds exciting. The historical part would be good if it were all Ken Burns-y, and the contemporary part would be cool if it were Big Thinkers-y [a la Tech TV] in mood.

Oh. And lots of Bullet Vision. ;)

Good luck!

[Writer@Large]

I like this idea better than the atheist/freethinker film project out there, "Eye of the Beholder." [Read the script on that one, it was a real stinker!] I'd certainly pay to see it!

In fact, I may buy a share. Who's with me?

--W@L

[fried beef sandwich]

UU as an atheist church? I don't think that's accurate.

[Era]

I have toyed with this idea, too, and thus I think it worth pursuing.

-Would you intend it to be of a style and quality that you think would fly at Film Festivals [do you plan to exhibit it there and do you think it possible to do so?] If not, what do you expect it's venue to be?

-Since you are soliciting feedback, I think that maybe the term "faithless" in the title might be strategically not optimal. I think it too loaded, personally. You want as many people as possible to "come inside" and see the film. I'd go with "Freethought in America" or Liberty of Conscience: America's Freethought Heritage, or something along those lines. Something with even more pizazz than that would be even better, but I'm shooting from the hip....

-In your interviews with the faithful, I would try to present a snippet from both, say, a Republican that has a small pov, and maybe a more progressive one [if such an animal exists], otherwise I think it would seem a bit skewed and prone to cheapshot stereotyping which will make moderates perhaps a bit squirmy? I think the inclusion of those within collectives or categories that are thought to be anti-atheistic will also have credibility for those on the fence and will be persuasive or unsettling, and make the possiblilty of acceptance or tolerance all the more obvious or likely.

-Sounds exciting. The historical part would be good if it were all Ken Burns-y, and the contemporary part would be cool if it were Big Thinkers-y [a la Tech TV] in mood.

Oh. And lots of Bullet Vision. ;)

Good luck!

I really appreciated your comments, though it seems you were mistaken. I am not involved with the film. If you desire your opinions to be taken into account, mail Daniel J. Geduld.

-Concerning the use of the term ‘freethought.’
Not all atheists are freethinkers and also, the film is mainly on atheism. Freethought encompasses other secularists and also, religious people too. Therefore, would it be accurate to use the word ‘freethought’? It could be reflected as a general aspect of atheism, and it is not.

Regards,

Era

[Era]

UU as an atheist church? I don't think that's accurate.

I agree with you.

Regards,

Era

[dayton]

Faithless? I am a nontheist, but I am not faithless. I have faith in a lot of things, just not in any gods.

With that said, I do think it would be an interesting documentary.


Dayton

[capsaicin67]

I really appreciated your comments, though it seems you were mistaken. I am not involved with the film. If you desire your opinions to be taken into account, mail Daniel J. Geduld.

I see. Got it. No, you're right, that was not clear in your original post. I understand now---thanks for clearing that up.

Concerning the use of the term ‘freethought.’
Not all atheists are freethinkers and also, the film is mainly on atheism. Freethought encompasses other secularists and also, religious people too. Therefore, would it be accurate to use the word ‘freethought’? It could be reflected as a general aspect of atheism, and it is not.

Actually, my understanding is that this is incorrect. Webster's defines "freethinker", the one word historical term, as synonymous with "atheist". And my simple understanding of the term is that it thusly does not encompass theists.

It has been my observation that many theists resist this when they become aware of the term in the same way that many people probably like to refer to themslelves as "Xian" because they strive to practice some progressive or charitable behaviors that popularly are considered like unto the mythological or historical Jesus figure. I've done this strategically myself though it probably isn't strictly accurate in technical or historical terms nor by majority or formal definition? In any case, when theists say that they are "freethinkers" too, it is a misnomer technically speaking I think. I think they mean that they like to think that they are "free" "thinking"---two words.

In any case, nontheistic terminology is a difficult topic as seen in many threads, and it can be confusing.

Speaking once more to the project which you linked to, I don't think the title is optimal, and whilst I think it important to "reclaim" the term "atheist", I would temper it a bit at first to re-introduce it [not abandon it, however], and dress-up the title a bit regardless in the interest of catching more flies with honey and all that marketing rot. "Faithless" is a loaded and problematic term [and definitely does not apply to all atheists] IMHO. That's pretty much it for me.

[capsaicin67]

....I agree that the stated misunderstanding of the full scope of UUism doesn't inspire confidence in the author of the prospectus as it seems he only has a superficial understanding of the subject matter? It's possible that was just a small blindspot, or simply a poorly worded fragment of the overall prospectus. But, initially, I find it significant......

[Era]

Replies from Daniel J. Geduld

I really appreciated your interest on the film project.
For that reason, I decided to e-mail some of the comments to Daniel J. Geduld.
The username and forum’s URL were not included in the e-mail, thus the letter was quite confidential.

The term ‘person’ added to an alphabetical letter replaced each username.

_________________________________________________________________

Eudaimonist

Ayn Rand is a serious omission and one which I need to work on. It's a very broad subject and there are bound to be things I have forgotten and will address as the project progresses.

Richard1366

I'd need some evidence for that one. All of the people on the list are people who have been quoted as saying they are atheists. If you can provide me a reliable quote, I'll include him.

capsaicin67 (First post)

- I'm planning on doing two versions: a film festival version which will be more 'arts' oriented and will be of feature length and a PBS version which will be more like an educational documentary and will fit PBS TV format rules. I have connections at public television which I hope to exploit.

- This is part of the problem of what may or may not unite atheists. Everyone has their own opinion of what defines an atheist and what words should be used.

- I'm going to try to interview as wide a range of people as I possibly can.

fried beef sandwich

This again goes to the definition of atheism. I used to go to a UU church and was accepted as an atheist their because UUism is 'creedless'... i.e. there is no faith required to be UU although you can believe in a deity. Does this make it an atheist 'religion'? This is exactly the topic that I wish to discuss in that part of the documentary. Also remember that many fundamentalists consider UUs to be atheists whether that is accurate in your eyes or not.

_________________________________________________________________

I expect that this was helpful to some extent.

Regards,

Era

[Arken]

This is really funny... if Era had only told me in the e-mail that the forum this was being discussed on was the IIDB, I would have just come in here and answered questions myself. I usually just hang out in PD so I didn't know you people were discussing it in here. Anyway, I'm the one doing the documentary. Currently, I'm trying to find funding although I have some good leads and I'm searching for people who know how to write grants. If you have any other questions you want answered, let me know.

[Godless Wonder]

Faithless? I am a nontheist, but I am not faithless. I have faith in a lot of things, just not in any gods.

With that said, I do think it would be an interesting documentary.


Dayton Faith in what sort of things? I think that religious, blind faith is such a destructive, horrible thing that you ought to find another word for what (I think, giving you the benefit of the doubt) you're calling faith here. Drop that faith from your vocabulary and use the word "faith" only to mean blind religious faith: believing in something (esp. with certainty) without evidence or even in the very teeth of contradictory evidence. Faith should be made into a dirty word, the new F-word. Faith deserves a wretched, horrible reputation, so let's give it the reputation it deserves. Saying "I have faith" should be equivalent to saying "I am not just an idiot, but I purposely choose to turn myself into an idiot." (It already means that in my mind.)

[Arken]

Please remember that words can have more than one meaning. I use 'faithless' in the sense of 'religious faith' not 'faith that the traffic light will eventually turn green.'

[EverLastingGodStopper]

Bumped, as per request. :) I'll look at this more soon.

[WhyBeNormal]

I love the idea for the documentary. :thumbs: I don't want to use PayPal. Are there other ways to invest? Also, how can I find out when it's done? I'd like to see that. (It'll be about the third PBS special I've ever seen.)

[Chris Weimer]

um, about the celebrities...Marlon Brando died...I don't think he'll be of any help ;)