…and this is a 
A logo for the godless: an impossible assignment?
Category: Godlessness
Posted on: October 28, 2006 5:03 PM, by PZ Myers
Norwegianity has put out a request to design an appropriate logo for all of us godless heathen bloggers. There's a certain religious deathcult that uses an instrument of torture as its immediately recognizable logo—it's very simple, clean, easy to draw, and they've made it their own. You see one of those things on a website or on a necklace and you instantly know to a very rough approximation the predilections of the owner. Why can't we have something like that?
You might be thinking the very idea is ridiculous, since freethinkers are such a diverse group, but you know, Christians also encompass a very wide spectrum of beliefs on so many issues, and that hasn't stopped them. It would be great to see somebody with some graphic talent come up with something we could all use.
There is a tradition of using the pansy (pensée) as a symbol, but it isn't exactly easy to render. The Invisible Pink Unicorn is cool, I think, but really just mocks silly beliefs. American Atheists has a trademarked symbol, a stylized atom, which really ought to be the symbol for Scientism or something, and I'd rather see a symbol that isn't specific to just atheism. I ran across one site with a simple idea, which might work; I'd have to think about it. It's an asterisk, which looks a tiny bit like a pansy, and has that open wildcard vibe to it.
Anyway, the kind of thing I would be looking for is something simple, fairly abstract, easy to render, and that wouldn't antagonize deists, agnostics, or atheists. It should be positive: no crucifixes with a slash through them, for instance. It shouldn't be weird—no flying spaghetti monsters, please—it shouldn't be ugly, it shouldn't be in-your-face and gloating, it should be unobtrusive. It ought to be the kind of symbol that if it were done up as a piece of jewelry, it would be tasteful. Remember, even if you do come up with a nice logo, the hard part is going to be getting a critical mass of unbelievers to adopt it and build a recognizable association with it (and be warned, no matter how gorgeous and elegant and clever an idea you come up with, there will be a solid cadre of the godless who will resolutely refuse to have anything to do with it, on general principles and intrinsic cussedness…which is OK.)
Talk about it in the comments, doodle up stuff and send it to me, and if there is any response at all, I'll put up a gallery of ideas later. If we've got something good, I'll use it on my site, maybe Mark will join in, and we can get the ball rolling.
We've already got lots of suggestions in the comments. Here are some that are easy to render with html:
Book Antiqua : * ∞ Ω ○ π ∅ ⊛ ☉ ☈ ♮ σ α Φ
Bookman Old Style : * ∞ Ω ○ π ∅ ⊛ ☉ ☈ ♮ σ α Φ
Century Schoolbook : * ∞ Ω ○ π ∅ ⊛ ☉ ☈ ♮ σ α Φ
Goudy Old Style : * ∞ Ω ○ π ∅ ⊛ ☉ ☈ ♮ σ α Φ
Lucida Grande : * ∞ Ω ○ π ∅ ⊛ ☉ ☈ ♮ σ α Φ
Times New Roman : * ∞ Ω ○ π ∅ ⊛ ☉ ☈ ♮ σ α Φ
There are also suggestions for combinations (an asterisk inside a circle, for instance—the default renders as a 6-lobed asterisk, unfortunately), or others that would need a professional artist to do—a spiral or a nautilus shell or a torch, for instance. We've also got one suggestion for an upraised middle finger, which is rather sweet, but since it's from a Christian we have to ignore it. Keep 'em coming!
And now a suggestion from Carl:
No fair! Carl could draw a swirly dog turd for us, and it would look good.
Two more suggestions from Manxome One:
Attached are what popped into my head upon reading your post about a godless logo.
The first is a stylized lowercase a with a period ( A, period!), which happens to look somewhat like a question mark on its side.
The second is the same idea, only the a is a highlighted portion of a stylized infinity symbol.
Here are some nice renderings of the asterisk in a circle idea from Lucas:
There's something I like about this. They remind me of echinoderms!
Oh, how I would love to subvert this stupid story you can find in every cheap beach trinket store along the Washington coast.
And another design from Nick:
More suggestions have come in overnight. I've added alpha and phi to the line of text symbols above, and here are some more graphical ideas:
John Pieret sends us a pansy:
Node_3 submits a rough draft of a galaxy:
Here's an interesting design:
Just for laughs (no way is this appropriate!), here's a cute suggestion:
What next? Hank Fox has a few suggestions in the comments. I'm going to be a bit elitist and say I don't like the idea of a poll; clicking a button doesn't require much thought or commitment, and is also easily abused. What I propose is to let the discussion here go on a few more days, and then I'll pull out the ones that get the most interest (the asterisk, the circle, the natural symbol, pi, something with DNA, the empty set are all strong contenders right now), and I'll ask their defenders to send me a summary of their support. I'll put up one more post on it, and ask for comments yay or nay, and I think what I'll do is weight the ones from people with weblogs who'd put the symbol in some prominent place more heavily. That's what we need to get this to work, is people who will use the symbol.
Another volley of entries…from GodfreyTemple:
And how about atheos?
Comments
How about the sign for infinity? Is someone already using that? It can be superimposed over--or placed under--a big letter "A".
Posted by: oxhead | October 28, 2006 5:16 PM
My suggestion: a perfect circle.
It can be interpreted as zero, or just a line surrounding nothingness, which is really the only thing atheists have in common.
Posted by: Caledonian | October 28, 2006 5:34 PM
You know, that * is probably the best. It's on the keyboard. Ω - Capital Omega is another good choice. It's the symbol for Ohms (resistence). And the last letter in the Greek alphabet. And something could be made up regarding that "alpha and omega" quote. Easy to craft, and noticable. An * might not bring to mind any reason for the symbology.
Posted by: Tatarize | October 28, 2006 5:38 PM
I always liked the happy human, but I guess that doesn't lend itself to jewellery very well. Also possibly trademarked.
Posted by: Andrew | October 28, 2006 5:47 PM
I second the idea: a perfect circle. Isn't that the message we all would like to project anyway--harmony, an ideal, a humanistic culture that values life and respect (achieved without religion)?
Posted by: Matt Dowling | October 28, 2006 5:54 PM
I second the idea: a perfect circle.
Me too. I was going to suggest a stickman, but I like the circle idea a lot better.
Posted by: 386sx | October 28, 2006 6:03 PM
Didn't Vonnegut put the asterisk to use in a not-so-tasteful and unflattering way?
Posted by: pablo | October 28, 2006 6:04 PM
Didn't Vonnegut put the asterisk to use in a not-so-tasteful and unflattering way?
Posted by: pablo | October 28, 2006 6:04 PM
Doesn't the military give dead athiests a helium atom on their grave marker? The atom cartoon is certainly recognised as a very secular sign.
Posted by: John McKay | October 28, 2006 6:04 PM
The most appropriate symbol would be a blank space (" "! and it's the biggest key on the keyboard!), but it wouldn't exactly be obvious. A simple circle is next best, but the weakness is that it is also visually relatively uninteresting. ∞ and Ω are good, too. One worry is that we don't want to use something that would be interpreted as us claiming to be the ultimate or the best or the greatest (even if it is true!), and those do lend themselves to that interpretation. At least * is nicely neutral in that regard.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 28, 2006 6:06 PM
If you want a logo to express simply what you often express at length in words, I suggest the following:
In the background a few very simple silouettes of some easily recognized religious symbols (cross, star of David, crescent-and-star of Islam, at least). In the foreground : a big middle finger.
Since the theme seems to be not so much "rationality and clear thought" as "we hate religion and want to insult it at every opportunity," this should be the perfect logo.
And, yeah, that's not tasteful, and that *is* in-your-face gloating... but pretty much every time I read about religion on this blog, it's in a belligerent tone, in-your-face-gloating, and frequently not tasteful, so I guess I think the logo fits. Ultimately, it's not clear how any not-negative symbol can really represent atheism. Some like to claim that atheism is its own religion -- which them might be amenable to a symbol -- but of course atheists reject that, saying that really it's just a lack of religion. Given that atheism is a lack of religion, it's hard to see how to symbolize that without including rejection.
If, on the other hand, you want a symbol for rationality and free thought-- well, that's not the same as atheism, since lots of the religious are also rational and freethinkers, despite how often all crowd on this blog likes to assert that that is semantically impossible. (Hint: when you assert that all Christians are not capable of free thought, the reaction is very similar to how you feel when certain Christians assert that atheists are incapable of having any moral sensibility.)
If you want a symbol for rationality, as opposed to rejecting religion, how about as stylized brain with a lightbulb over it? Scales might make a good symbol (weighing the evidence), but the notion of justice has already taken that one.
How about one of the less-known Platonic Solids? An 8-sider (whatever the heck they're called) or a 12-sider. Not as trivail to render as a 2d cross, but still very simple and stylized. Plato may not be the scion of rationality and free thought, but that era in ancient Greece is where at least Western Civiliztaion got the notion that the Universe (or, at the time, the World) *could* be understand from natural principles, without necessary reference to theology.
-Rob
Posted by: Rob Knop | October 28, 2006 6:06 PM
How about a double helix? It's fairly simple-looking, and I think it would make a pretty pendant, ring, or earrings...
Posted by: lee | October 28, 2006 6:09 PM
I like the circle or the Omega. Actually, I like the Omega better, because it's not closed. Maybe an open circle...
Posted by: Stogoe | October 28, 2006 6:09 PM
I vote for PI.
PI is universal.
The asterisk could easily be interpreted as a splat of some alien birdshit that had fallen on some alian bovine in the neighboring galaxy.
MYOB'
.
Posted by: MYOB | October 28, 2006 6:14 PM
Pathetic. Like them.
Posted by: Clastito | October 28, 2006 6:16 PM
I like the asterisk, though I'm not sure of the verbal link between "pansy" and pensée. Are pansies called pansies in other languages?
I think, for maximum identification with pansies, a five-pointed asterisk works best, but it would be a better resemblance if it was up-side-down.
Posted by: NelC | October 28, 2006 6:20 PM
Visually uninteresting? I do have a fondness for minimialism, it's true - but a cross isn't interesting either, and the less ornate a version is, the more common it is. (The Russian Tribar Cross has never been particularly popular.)
Infinity signs can't be properly balanced on the horizontal - their center of mass keeps trying to slide as far down as possible, so when the symbol is attached off-center it becomes a symbol eight and even when perfectly on-center tends to spin.
Perfect circles have the added advantage of being something that we can conceive of but that don't actually exist in reality - they're only symbols, with no reality.
The omega is fine, but it calls to mind Christian thinking, at least to me. Circles do have the advantage of being very easy to draw - they're even better than crosses or the vesica piscis.
Posted by: Caledonian | October 28, 2006 6:23 PM
Thank you for your considerate, polite, and helpful contribution, Rob. Perhaps you could use the digitus impudicus as your personal symbol, but no, that's not what I'm interested in. You might also look up the specific term "freethought": it refers to all belief that rejects organized religion, and includes deists as well as agnostics and atheists.
You're trying to argue for *, aren't you? That interpretation would win me over.
&pi: is an interesting idea, since it does tie in to the circle proposal, too.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 28, 2006 6:24 PM
the circle and the open circle are signs of zen...which is non-theirstic
Posted by: joe in oklahoma | October 28, 2006 6:25 PM
I just sent these via email, not sure if they'll render here. Some stuff I found browsing in the Unicode sets.
♁ = earth (for earthling: sorry about the cross).
☉ = sun, also apropos.
☼ = sun (a variant)
◯ = large circle.
㊷ - no comment
☄ = comet: where did we come from anyway?
Posted by: paul | October 28, 2006 6:27 PM
I ran across another website a while ago that addressed this same question, and the last suggestion offered was the empty set symbol in math, which I think would make a perfect logo for atheism.
The empty set is just that--empty, which is exactly what atheism is. Atheism is not a positive belief, but a lack of a certain belief.
Posted by: Saint Gasoline | October 28, 2006 6:29 PM
You're right: the Zen enso is already there, although it seems to usually be rendered calligraphically.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 28, 2006 6:33 PM
I like the five-lobed asterisk that Intrepid (at the link) suggested, for all his/her reasons. I also like the perfect circle, for the reasons given above. If you join them (asterisk within circle), it is a simple graphic yet unique.
BTW, the keyboard asterisk may or may not be five-lobed; I think it depends on the font. A six-lobed asterisk (as found on my keyboard) reminds me too much of Mike Douglas and the '60s. I remember my bathtub being covered in anti-slip six-lobed asterisks. Definitely let's go with five lobes.
So, a five-lobed asterisk in a circle. How about that?
Posted by: bPer | October 28, 2006 6:33 PM
the circle and the open circle are signs of zen...which is non-theirstic
Well then, the stickman it is. Okay, thanks for all your ideas everybody.
Posted by: 386sx | October 28, 2006 6:36 PM
I like the asterisk, but that's not, like he claims, Times New Roman. The Times New Roman one has six arms, which kind of ruins the pansy link. Near as I can tell, that's Century.
Not sure how widely that particular font is supported, and most other fonts I have either have the six arms, or produce very ugly five-armed asterisks.
Posted by: Cairnarvon | October 28, 2006 6:36 PM
The circle can of course also be interpreted as a zero, standing for the number of gods we believe in.
Posted by: Harald Hanche-Olsen | October 28, 2006 6:40 PM
Yeah, it has to be bold Times New Roman to get the 5-lobed asterisk. Arial Bold works, too, but who wants to use Arial?
Others with the 5-lobed asterisk: Book Antiqua (interestingly cocked), Bookman Old Style, Century Schoolbook, Comic Sans (ick!), Cooper Black, Copperplate, Goudy Old Style, Lucida Grande, Palatino...many, but not all, of the serif fonts render the bold asterisk with 5 lobes.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 28, 2006 6:41 PM
Oh, and barely had I posted that before I thought of the symbol for the empty set ∅, actually inspired by the Danish/Norwegian letter Ø. The biggest con is that it looks a bit like a sign stating that something is forbidden. No, I think I would prefer the circle after all.
Posted by: Harald Hanche-Olsen | October 28, 2006 6:44 PM
...
...
I like the asterisk. A lot.
(But one caution about it: Make sure to specify that it is THIS five-armed symbol, and not the six-armed one. Inevitably, some wit will compare the six-armed version to Kurt Vonnegut's illo of an asshole.)
The asterisk will need an identifying name, a word (possibly even a nonsense syllable) that's easier to say than "asterisk." How about calling it the "mentis" (Latin for "mind")?
(Once you get the symbol you want, how about copyrighting it just for the hell of it, and then when the godders start stealing it to have their stupid fish eating it, seriously sue the shit out of them.)
Also, how about a Latin motto somewhere along the way? Something like "Free minds" (Solvo mens? Mens solvo?) or "Free thought" (Solvo sententia?) or "At last, freedom" (Tandem licentia?).
Finally, if a large number decides to accept a unifying symbol, let's be in-your-fucking-face about it. Show up at public meetings wearing it. Flaunt it every day. Talk about it. Call attention to it. Push it. March with it. Make it Cool. Get it onto college campuses, and into high schools. Hold public events. Give away t-shirts with the mentis and the motto on it. Put up posters. Billboards. Get testimonials. Hold midnight vigils at city hall. Get on TV. (Some sort of well-defined message would be good, at this point.)
I have this fun image of starting an underground movement. Get the thing known by making up a shitload of stickers of various sizes, which could be placed, guerrilla-style, on every Christian billboard, poster and city bus advertisement - anywhere off church grounds (I think this is important) - everywhere in the country. Every public Ten Commandments monument and hilltop cross in the country should have a mentis stuck on it.
OR! -- Have a "Mentis Watch" website showing all the unlikely and interesting and devilish places they appear. With pics of the mentis and of the person who "discovered" it.
I want to see photos of the mentis taken from every Christian and anti-evolution theme park in the nation. I want to see it on the hats of college students mugging for the camera from the midst of an anti-abortion rally. I want to see it Photoshopped onto the Popemobile. I want to see it stuck inside the cover of every Gideon's Bible in Texas. I want to see it stuck to the back of Pat Robertson's thousand-dollar-suited ass. When Billy Graham dies and is buried, I want to know that a tiny mentis is adhered to his coffin somewhere.
Heh: I've joked for years about the Secret Atheist Handshake: I'm thinking that when two people wearing or displaying the mentis meet, they should both grin hugely and give a mutual "thumbs up" sign.
We need a movement, a brotherhood, a band of like-minded men and women working together toward a world less mired in goddiness. Because, really, we actually are in a war. They declared it, but we and our children (and civilization, really) are the victims. And they're eating us alive. It's time to recognize the facts ... and fight.
It can be a fun fight, or a grim fight, but there damn well oughta be a fight.
(Big grin, thumbs up.)
...
...
Posted by: Hank Fox | October 28, 2006 6:44 PM
Thank you for your considerate, polite, and helpful contribution, Rob.
Likewise, in very much the same vein, thank you for your invariably considerate and polite contributions to the whole discussion as to how science might interact with those who might have some vestiges of religion.
-Rob
Posted by: Rob Knop | October 28, 2006 6:45 PM
I think the empty set symbol would be perfect for atheism, myself. However, my opinion doesn't matter that much, as I'm a Taoist. *shrugs*
Posted by: Qalmlea | October 28, 2006 6:45 PM
I vote for Empty Set: ø.
Posted by: James Hrynyshyn | October 28, 2006 6:47 PM
A simple circle is too much like zero or nothingness, and omega has been appropriated by Christians quite a bit. How about a stylized Fibonacci spiral (like a nautilus), with each chamber a different hue, to suggest the natural origin of both complexity and diversity?
SH
Posted by: Scott Hatfield | October 28, 2006 6:47 PM
How about a wide open eye(though I suppose the egyptians already nabbed that one), or a head with the top cut off/spread open/something representing an open mind?
Posted by: JD | October 28, 2006 6:50 PM
JD: Er, I don't think so. Remember the good old skeptic saying, "there is a difference between an open mind and a hole in the head". Or "keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out".
Posted by: Harald Hanche-Olsen | October 28, 2006 6:54 PM
How about a stylized Fibonacci spiral (like a nautilus), with each chamber a different hue, to suggest the natural origin of both complexity and diversity?
You mean like a fancy curvy stickman, except each stick would be a different color. I like it. I like it a lot.
Posted by: 386sx | October 28, 2006 6:54 PM
Somehow, I don't think that using a "pansy" as a symbol is going to produce much resonance with most people.
Posted by: Azkyroth | October 28, 2006 6:55 PM
I quite like the asterix, but think it would only be a matter of time before the theists identify it as a styalised pentagram... See! Those heathens really ARE Satanists... look at their symbol!
I think a torch would make a great Freethought symbol because of its associations with the past, present, and future:
- Freethinkers have been burned at the stake for their pursuit of knowledge
- The enlightenment was the light that bought an end to the dark ages
- We freethinkers are carrying the torch of knowledge from generation to generation - standing on the shoulders of giants, if you will.
And so on.
I played around with an idea for a torch symbol here (http://www.freethought.net) but, as you'll see, I'm no graphic artist!
Posted by: NonProphet | October 28, 2006 7:01 PM
I like the astronomy Sun symbol ⊙ (or CIRCLED DOT OPERATOR as it's called in the MacOS Character Palette). It's appropriate given that we are all star dust anyway :-)
There is also a CIRCLED ASTERISK OPERATOR, ⊛ , if you want to use an asterisk. It's rendered a bit small here.
Ian
Posted by: Ian Robinson | October 28, 2006 7:03 PM
R
That's my suggestion. The mathematical symbol for the set of Real Numbers, symbolizing acceptance of what is real. (It has been argued the real world prefers complex numbers to reals - but using that argument for symbolism is too obscure.)
It's not as easy to draw as the cross or the circle, but it comes close.
Posted by: llewelly | October 28, 2006 7:18 PM
Larger rendition of the Sun symbol at:
http://www.canicula.com/wp/?p=196
Ian
Posted by: Ian Robinson | October 28, 2006 7:18 PM
I really truly like the empty set symbol best, but my friend Oystein in Norway, who is altogether too interested in me already, will wonder why I've suddenly taken to wearing his initial around my neck. No.
Next most I like the asterisk, but in a circle. And not a lobed one... I can't imagine getting a guy to wear flowers unless he's, you know, a hippie. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I think I would like it better if the asterisk "arms" were straight or flared.
How about an asterisk in a circle and square, reminiscent of Da Vinci's famous human proportion diagram?
Posted by: speedwell | October 28, 2006 7:19 PM
How about a circle containing a gene'ish symbol, drawn like a sideways infinity with the ends cut off (touching the top and bottom of the circle). It has a yin-yang flavour, and the circle benefits mentioned above. Believe me, it looks a lot better than this sounds.
I drew a lousy version with Paint, and put it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:601-Symbol.jpg
Maybe a real artist could do it well.
Posted by: 601 | October 28, 2006 7:26 PM
A stick man in a da-Vinci-style circle and square would be a great symbol for humanists. I don't think it quite sums up atheism, after all.
Posted by: Caledonian | October 28, 2006 7:28 PM
I have to say I don't really like any of the symbols I've seen proposed (I didn't read all the comments though). They're all either too simple, too complex, too over-used, with too many different meanings (pi or the asterisk for example. I mean... those things are used all the time!). Regardless of all the hidden meanings and symbolisms one could come up with certain symbols, the very fact that they're used a lot disqualifies them as a symbol one might want to use for anything. The symbol has to be (HAS TO BE) unique and recognizable, otherwise it will go into oblivion very very soon.
As for what I propose... well... I don't know... I'll get back to you on that. lol. I admit I can criticize a lot, but have no good ideas of my own :P
Posted by: TAW | October 28, 2006 7:30 PM
Along the lines of R, how about this interesting unicode character: ☈? It's the symbol for "thunderstorm".
There are already a bunch of religions symbols richly represented in the character set -- more examples here.
I very much like the nautilus idea (for more than a few reasons...) but I fear it's not easy to render, and the kind of detail you're talking about wouldn't scale well.
The "gene'ish" symbol is interesting...another that would need a pro to clean it up.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 28, 2006 7:32 PM
I have to say I don't really like any of the symbols I've seen proposed (I didn't read all the comments though). They're all either too simple, too complex, too over-used, with too many different meanings (pi or the asterisk for example. I mean... those things are used all the time!). Regardless of all the hidden meanings and symbolisms one could come up with certain symbols, the very fact that they're used a lot disqualifies them as a symbol one might want to use for anything. The symbol has to be (HAS TO BE) unique and recognizable, otherwise it will go into oblivion very very soon.
As for what I propose... well... I don't know... I'll get back to you on that. lol. I admit I can criticize a lot, but have no good ideas of my own :P
Posted by: TAW | October 28, 2006 7:32 PM
I vote for the perfect circle. Null set isn't symmetrical, and it reminds me of a no-smoking sign. I also like Scott Hatfield's idea about the nautilus; I already have a Fibonacci/nautilus T-shirt.
Posted by: j | October 28, 2006 7:33 PM
Hank, "solvo" means "I free", as in the verb. It'd be under "free" in an English-Latin dictionary, I guess, but the word you're looking for is "liber". "Free minds" would be "mentes liberae".
"Mind" is just "mens", BTW. "Mentis" is the genitive singular, meaning "of the mind".
Interestingly, "mens" is also Dutch for "human".
Posted by: Cairnarvon | October 28, 2006 7:34 PM
I suggest the wise ole owl.
http://tinyurl.com/ygmpjd
http://tinyurl.com/yl3lwz
These two links are for greek owls.
Symbol of Athena and Athens.
It has the added benefit of being a sign of the devil and illuminati and assorted other backwards BS.
Posted by: Zed | October 28, 2006 7:34 PM
A stick man in a da-Vinci-style circle and square would be a great symbol for humanists. I don't think it quite sums up atheism, after all.
Really? Why not? The asterisk or stick man can stand for the self or for humans, the circle for the world or totality or all those nifty things the circle proponents are saying, and the square for reality, truth, science, etc. (except for that weird fringe Christian sect Mom got sucked into one time).
Posted by: speedwell | October 28, 2006 7:34 PM
No symbols for me thanks. The symbol of not believing in god is lack of a symbol. I love designs, and can see wearing or bearing any number of them, but I can't see belonging to a "I'm not a stamp collector" club.
Posted by: QrazyQat | October 28, 2006 7:34 PM
Hey, I can't believe no one's nominated Piss Christ yet. C'mon, people, where's your sense of the obvious?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ
Posted by: Mr. Orange | October 28, 2006 7:35 PM
that weird fringe Christian sect
Sorry, I was referring to "four square."
This is hard. How do you come up with a "holy symbol" that basically means "not a holy symbol?" Wow.
Posted by: speedwell | October 28, 2006 7:36 PM
I'm for the circle. I'd rather be mistaken for a practitioner of Zen than most other belief systems anyway.
Posted by: Anton Mates | October 28, 2006 7:38 PM
I'm all for the Fibonacci spiral, just as a simple curve. It can be easily drawn by anyone (so long as mathematicians don't get picky), can be stylized easily in many ways, and demonstrates the generation of order from simple rules. Parallels to the mortal coil being all there is are obvious.
Posted by: Amos | October 28, 2006 7:41 PM
Hard core theists have always insisted atheists are satanists. In their universe, we support satan by definition. That connection to satanism, valid or not, is far stronger and more widely recognized than any tenuous resemblance between a pentacle and 5-lobe asterix. Pareidolia will ensure any symbol we choose will be similarly close to something negative.
Whatever symbol we choose, we must continue to say: There's no reason to believe Satan exists. Satan is nothing more than a scaremongering tactic - an idea that exists to enable the unscrupulous to exploit the unwary. There is no reason to believe a 5-lobe asterisk as our symbol will change the amount of energy we need to expend countering the 'satanist' strawman.
Posted by: llewelly | October 28, 2006 7:41 PM
I like the owl idea. Then I can stick "O RLY?" under it.
Posted by: Baratos | October 28, 2006 7:42 PM
...
...
Asterisk. Asterisk. Asterisk. (Mentis, Mentis, Mentis.)
Beautiful. Simple. Non-sciency, non-mathy (think about the broader population-set you want to "get" it).
IT HAS THE HUGE ADVANTAGE THAT IT DOESN'T ALREADY MEAN SOMETHING.
If we adopt a symbol already full of meaning, we have to tweak it away from people who already "own" it. Just more opposition to deal with.
With the simple, clean, elegant asterisk (ahem, mentis) we can build the meaning into it as we go. We can give it its own name, OUR name (did I say "mentis" already?), fer chrissake.
And again, regarding that broader population-set, the asterisk is friendly, familiar, non-mysterious, and contains no hint of "nyah-nyah, we know something you don't know, and we're not telling you!"
Asterisk. (Um ... Mentis.)
...
...
Posted by: Hank Fox | October 28, 2006 7:44 PM
A simple rising sun, or a torch, or a lantern. Something with an "enlightenment" connotation. Maybe a trilobite or a fossilized fish (from the darwin fish wars).
Posted by: jeffw | October 28, 2006 7:45 PM
I like the section mark (not sure if it has a more proper name) rotated at 45 degrees to represent the galaxy and the breadth of thought that gets along just fine without any gods. §
Posted by: tng | October 28, 2006 7:46 PM
There's a great Gnostic (secular) symbol for the unity of the cosmos. It's easier to draw than to describe, but here goes:
1) Imagine a map compass with four letters--N, E, S, W--equidistant from a center point.
2) Now draw four fairly small circles around those letters and lighty mark the center point.
3) Now take away the compass leaving four equal-sized circles.
4) Now draw eight line segments from the outer borders of each circle (two segments per circle), converging at the center point.
The finished product looks sort of like a Maltese Cross if you squint your eyes, or a comic strip explosion with four circles being pushed forward, but doesn't resemble the Roman execution device.
Posted by: lockean | October 28, 2006 7:47 PM
I gotta suggestion, though all you guys have much better ideas, and mine is purely stupidity for stupidity's sake, but how about Teh Chupacabran logo?
Posted by: JackGoff | October 28, 2006 7:48 PM
I guess the most obvious and appropriate symbol is some sort of light, lamp or lantern.
Posted by: lockean | October 28, 2006 7:50 PM
Thinking about it, though, I REALLY like the idea of R, or maybe N as the symbol. Set theory represent!
Posted by: JackGoff | October 28, 2006 7:50 PM
I like the lowercase sigma: σ
It's a symbol for deviation from the norm, and also implies that we are happy with the sum of knowledge so far. And it's a nice glyph.
Posted by: John Wilkins | October 28, 2006 7:53 PM
I'd suggest a silouette of the men who made rational atheism possible.
A rational person today can look at the world around them and come to the conclusion that no supernatural being is necessary to explain their existence. Several thinkers and experimenters make that possible. Copernicus established that the earth is not the center of the universe. Darwin provided an explanation of how complex plants and humans came to inhabit the earth. Watson and Crick described the mechanism for inheriting the complexity built up by natural selection.
There might be others who deserve to be in the logo, possibly someone like Hubble who helped us understand the enormity of the universe. Maybe Schrödinger for giving us the uncertainty principle.
You could have an outline for car bumpers and a nice relief for jewelry.
Posted by: jscarry@johnscarry.com | October 28, 2006 7:53 PM
But Hank, then the other kids on the playground will call it the "non-praying mentis" to which we can retort that we have but one, ahem, @$$ to risk. heh.
Jeffw, I thought of that "light" thing but my artist fiance already had a design in the finals for the Brights logo. Plus all that light, sun, torch, candle, etc. imagery is way too pagan, even Christian, for me.
I think a circle in a square is stylish, adequately meaningful in the direction we want, really easy to draw, render, and wear, and sufficiently distinct from existing symbology.
OK, that's my final answer, circle-in-square. See 3D rendering in "gold" here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sightrays/281738279/
Posted by: speedwell | October 28, 2006 7:54 PM
Hasn't this already been done by The Brights?
Posted by: Brock Tice | October 28, 2006 7:57 PM
I think a circle in a square could imply believing a thing obviously contrary to the facts--i.e. trying to stuff a round peg in a square hole. I'm against that one.
Posted by: Amos | October 28, 2006 7:58 PM
Okay, apparently you have image linking disabled. The icon is here.
Posted by: Brock Tice | October 28, 2006 7:58 PM
You mean a square peg in a round hole. And that's really reaching.
Posted by: speedwell | October 28, 2006 7:59 PM
It was the question of why, every time I do a story about the Church, they won't be interviewed. Why are they different from all other institutions we do stories on?
"Why do they always manage to move the air date at least a month back with the legal department?
"That was the big question: What are you hiding? Why should I give you all the questions I'm going to ask before you've even decided if you're going to be interviewed? And that's the kind of thing the Church typically does. It's not allowing you to be a journalist.
"I guess it's similar to the way they obey canon law versus civil law. It's kind of like they make their own rules for everything."
*********************
Source: http://torontosun.com/Entertainment/Movies/2006/10/27/2144887-sun.html
Thought that this may be just one more nail in the coffin for protecting religion. Dawkins and Harris are right to get ticked because we are so scared to challenge religion ---especially when it serves as an incubator for evils such as these because people are told to check their brains at the door and not question.
The movie that this review is about is very frank about how far up the chain of command the blame goes. I did read this:
Neither does the longtime segment-producer for CNN, CBS and ABC spare newly installed Pope Benedict, who, before he took office, presided over high-level Vatican committees looking into priestly abuse. Ultimately, the committee of bishops washed their hands of the whole sordid mess, not only prompting lawsuits from victims but also prompting President George W. Bush to grant the pontiff immunity from prosecution here.
Source: http://www.examiner.com/a-367187~_Evil__mastermind.html
Please reread the last sentence of that quote. Can anyone back that up? Can anyone explain to me how that happened??
Conservatives are always about PROTECTING THE CHILDREN--- from the evil OUT THERE--- but not the assholes that are in their midst. Why??
Posted by: anonymous | October 28, 2006 7:59 PM
It was the question of why, every time I do a story about the Church, they won't be interviewed. Why are they different from all other institutions we do stories on?
"Why do they always manage to move the air date at least a month back with the legal department?
"That was the big question: What are you hiding? Why should I give you all the questions I'm going to ask before you've even decided if you're going to be interviewed? And that's the kind of thing the Church typically does. It's not allowing you to be a journalist.
"I guess it's similar to the way they obey canon law versus civil law. It's kind of like they make their own rules for everything."
*********************
Source: http://torontosun.com/Entertainment/Movies/2006/10/27/2144887-sun.html
Thought that this may be just one more nail in the coffin for protecting religion. Dawkins and Harris are right to get ticked because we are so scared to challenge religion ---especially when it serves as an incubator for evils such as these because people are told to check their brains at the door and not question.
The movie that this review is about is very frank about how far up the chain of command the blame goes. I did read this:
Neither does the longtime segment-producer for CNN, CBS and ABC spare newly installed Pope Benedict, who, before he took office, presided over high-level Vatican committees looking into priestly abuse. Ultimately, the committee of bishops washed their hands of the whole sordid mess, not only prompting lawsuits from victims but also prompting President George W. Bush to grant the pontiff immunity from prosecution here.
Source: http://www.examiner.com/a-367187~_Evil__mastermind.html
Please reread the last sentence of that quote. Can anyone back that up? Can anyone explain to me how that happened??
Conservatives are always about PROTECTING THE CHILDREN--- from the evil OUT THERE--- but not the assholes that are in their midst. Why??
Posted by: anonymous | October 28, 2006 8:02 PM
Hahaha! I love "non-praying mentis"!
Just another little linkage that will help disseminate it and make it stick permanently in people's minds.
Posted by: Hank Fox | October 28, 2006 8:02 PM
I'm surprised no one has suggested the logo from Ghostbusters....
Posted by: Jeff Chamberlain | October 28, 2006 8:06 PM
I've been partial to the musical symbol for natural since I came across it as a suggestion on this topic, e.g. the image at http://www.dolmetsch.com/natural.gif
Alternately, the inverted exclamation could work, too, ¡ , interpreted as stylized head and body, yet symbolizing a surety of our position against the grain of the rest of humanity!
I like the five-pointed asterisk, but I'd dub an atheist version of it a pentarisk or better yet, a pentisk. An option combining the above would be a "pentisk" made of exclamation points (Times New Roman Bold) with the common point in the center. It has the advantage of looking star-like, maybe atomish.
Posted by: minusRusty | October 28, 2006 8:06 PM
Kidding....
Danger: Do Not Feed!
http://digikam3rdparty.free.fr/Templates/Non-free/danger.png
Middle finger:
http://www.designofsignage.com/application/symbol/hands/largesymbols/zz-zzzzz.html
Shock danger:
http://www.designofsignage.com/application/symbol/hands/largesymbols/danger.html
Posted by: George | October 28, 2006 8:13 PM
Sigma ( σ ) also ties in graphically with that zen circle, too.