Atheism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted on by

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[3][4][5] Most inclusively, atheism is the absence of belief that any deities exist.[4][5][6][7] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[8][9] which, in its most general form, is the belief that at least one deity exists.[9][10]

The term "atheism" originated from the Greek (atheos), meaning "without god(s)", used as a pejorative term applied to those thought to reject the gods worshiped by the larger society.[11] With the spread of freethought, skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in criticism of religion, application of the term narrowed in scope. The first individuals to identify themselves using the word "atheist" lived in the 18th century. Some ancient and modern religions are referred to as atheistic, as they either have no concepts of deities or deny a creator deity, yet still revere other god-like entities.

Arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to social and historical approaches. Rationales for not believing in any supernatural deity include the lack of empirical evidence;[13][14] the problem of evil; the argument from inconsistent revelations; the rejection of concepts which cannot be falsified; and the argument from nonbelief.[13][15] Although some atheists have adopted secular philosophies,[16][17] there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.[18] Many atheists hold that atheism is a more parsimonious worldview than theism and therefore that the burden of proof lies not on the atheist to disprove the existence of God but on the theist to provide a rationale for theism.[19]

Since conceptions of atheism vary, accurate estimations of current numbers of atheists are difficult.[20] A global poll conducted by Gallup International in 2012 featured over 50,000 respondents and indicated that 13% of those interviewed said they were "convinced atheists."[21] Older estimates have indicated that atheists comprise 2% of the world's population, while the irreligious add a further 12%.[22] An even older survey by the BBC, in 2004, recorded atheists as comprising 8% of the world's population.[23] According to other studies, rates of atheism are among the highest in Western nations, again to varying degrees: the United States, for example, returned 4%,[24] while Canada returned 28%.[25] The figures for a 2010 Eurobarometer survey in the European Union (EU), reported that 20% of the EU population claimed not to believe in "any sort of spirit, God or life force".[26]

Writers disagree how best to define and classify atheism,[27] contesting what supernatural entities it applies to, whether it is an assertion in its own right or merely the absence of one, and whether it requires a conscious, explicit rejection. Atheism has been regarded as compatible with agnosticism,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34] and has also been contrasted with it.[35][36][37] A variety of categories have been used to distinguish the different forms of atheism.

Some of the ambiguity and controversy involved in defining atheism arises from difficulty in reaching a consensus for the definitions of words like deity and god. The plurality of wildly different conceptions of God and deities leads to differing ideas regarding atheism's applicability. The ancient Romans accused Christians of being atheists for not worshiping the pagan deities. Gradually, this view fell into disfavor as theism came to be understood as encompassing belief in any divinity.

With respect to the range of phenomena being rejected, atheism may counter anything from the existence of a deity, to the existence of any spiritual, supernatural, or transcendental concepts, such as those of Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism and Taoism.[39]

Definitions of atheism also vary in the degree of consideration a person must put to the idea of gods to be considered an atheist. Atheism has sometimes been defined to include the simple absence of belief that any deities exist. This broad definition would include newborns and other people who have not been exposed to theistic ideas. As far back as 1772, Baron d'Holbach said that "All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God."[40] Similarly, George H. Smith (1979) suggested that: "The man who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe in a god. This category would also include the child with the conceptual capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an atheist."[41] Smith coined the term implicit atheism to refer to "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it" and explicit atheism to refer to the more common definition of conscious disbelief. Ernest Nagel contradicts Smith's definition of atheism as merely "absence of theism", acknowledging only explicit atheism as true "atheism".[42]

Philosophers such as Antony Flew[43] and Michael Martin have contrasted positive (strong/hard) atheism with negative (weak/soft) atheism. Positive atheism is the explicit affirmation that gods do not exist. Negative atheism includes all other forms of non-theism. According to this categorization, anyone who is not a theist is either a negative or a positive atheist. The terms weak and strong are relatively recent, while the terms negative and positive atheism are of older origin, having been used (in slightly different ways) in the philosophical literature[43] and in Catholic apologetics.[44] Under this demarcation of atheism, most agnostics qualify as negative atheists.

While Martin, for example, asserts that agnosticism entails negative atheism,[31] many agnostics see their view as distinct from atheism,[45][46] which they may consider no more justified than theism or requiring an equal conviction.[45] The assertion of unattainability of knowledge for or against the existence of gods is sometimes seen as indication that atheism requires a leap of faith.[47][48] Common atheist responses to this argument include that unproven religious propositions deserve as much disbelief as all other unproven propositions,[49] and that the unprovability of a god's existence does not imply equal probability of either possibility.[50] Scottish philosopher J. J. C. Smart even argues that "sometimes a person who is really an atheist may describe herself, even passionately, as an agnostic because of unreasonable generalised philosophical skepticism which would preclude us from saying that we know anything whatever, except perhaps the truths of mathematics and formal logic."[51] Consequently, some atheist authors such as Richard Dawkins prefer distinguishing theist, agnostic and atheist positions along a spectrum of theistic probabilitythe likelihood that each assigns to the statement "God exists".

More:

Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Atheism – Main Page – Conservapedia

Posted on by

From Conservapedia

Atheism, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and other philosophy reference works, is the denial of the existence of God.[1]

As far as individuals adopting an atheistic worldview, atheism has a number of causal factors which will be addressed shortly.

In addition, an examination of atheism will be offered and some of the historical events relating to atheism will also be covered. For example, since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the theory of evolution which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists or agnostics.[2] Furthermore, some of the effects of atheism on individuals and society will be addressed.

See also: Schools of atheist thought and Atheist factions

Atheists claim there are two main reasons for their denial of the existence of God and/or disbelief in God: the conviction that there is positive evidence or argument that God does not exist (Strong atheism which is also sometimes called positive atheism), and their claim that theists bear the burden of proof to show that God exists, that they have failed to do so, and that belief is therefore unwarranted (Weak atheism).

Below are three common ways that atheism manifests itself:

See also: Atheist factions and Schools of atheist thought and Atheist cults

Jacques Rousseau wrote in the Daily Maverick: "Elevatorgate..has resulted in three weeks of infighting in the secular community. Some might observe that we indulge in these squabbles fairly frequently."[4] An ex-atheist wrote: "As an Atheist for 40 years, I noticed that there is not just a wide variety of Atheist positions, but there exists an actual battle between certain Atheist factions."[5]

See also: Atheist movement and Atheism and anger and Atheism and bitterness

See more here:

Atheism - Main Page - Conservapedia

Demographics of atheism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted on by

A 2012 poll on the demographics of atheism by Gallup International, featuring over 50,000 respondents worldwide, recorded that 13% of those interviewed said they were "convinced atheists".[1] Other studies have concluded that atheists comprise anywhere from 2% to 8% of the world's population, with irreligious individuals adding a further 10% to 20%.[2][3][4] In Scandinavia and East Asia, and particularly in China, atheists and the irreligious are the majority.[1] In Africa and South America, atheists are typically in the single digits.[1]

Historical records of atheist philosophy span several millennia. Atheistic schools are found in early Indian thought and have existed from the times of the historical Vedic religion.[5] Western atheism has its roots in pre-Socratic Greek philosophy, but did not emerge as a distinct world-view until the late Enlightenment.[6]

Discrepancies exist among sources as to how atheist and religious demographics are changing. Social scientific assessment of the extent of "atheism" in various populations is problematic. First, in most of the world outside of East Asia most populations are believers in either a monotheistic or polytheistic system. Consequently questions to assess non belief often take the form of any negation of the prevailing belief rather than an assertion of positive atheism and these will then be accounted accurately to rising "atheism".[7][8][9] According to the 2012 Gallup International survey, the number of atheists is on the rise across the world, with religiosity generally declining.[10]

The demographics of atheism are substantially difficult to quantify. Different people interpret atheism and related terms differently, and it can be hard to draw boundaries between atheism, nonreligious beliefs, and nontheistic religious and spiritual beliefs. Furthermore, atheists may not report themselves as such, to prevent suffering from social stigma, discrimination, and persecution in some countries.[11]

Because some governments have strongly promoted atheism and others have strongly condemned it, atheism may be either over-reported or under-reported for different countries. There is a great deal of room for debate as to the accuracy of any method of estimation, as the opportunity for misreporting (intentionally or not) a category of people without an organizational structure is high. Also, many surveys on religious identification ask people to identify themselves as "agnostics" or "atheists", which is potentially confusing, since these terms are interpreted differently, with some identifying themselves as being agnostic atheists. Additionally, many of these surveys only gauge the number of irreligious people, not the number of actual atheists, or group the two together. For example, research indicates that the fastest growing religious status may be "no religion" in the United States, but this includes all kinds of atheists, agnostics, and theists.[12][13] Non-religious people make up 9.66%, while one fifth of them are atheists.[3]

Statistics on atheism are often difficult to represent accurately for a variety of reasons. Atheism is a position compatible with other forms of identity. Some atheists also consider themselves Agnostic, Buddhist, Hindu, Jains, Taoist, or hold other related philosophical beliefs. Some, like Secular Jews and Shintoists, may indulge in some religious activities as a way of connecting with their culture, all the while being atheist. Therefore, given limited poll options, some may use other terms to describe their identity. Some politically motivated organizations that report or gather population statistics may, intentionally or unintentionally, misrepresent atheists. Survey designs may bias results due to the nature of elements such as the wording of questions and the available response options. Also, many atheists, particularly former Catholics and former Mormons, are still counted as Christians in church rosters, although surveys generally ask samples of the population and do not look in church rosters. Other Christians believe that "once a person is [truly] saved, that person is always saved", a doctrine known as eternal security.[14] Statistics are generally collected on the assumption that religion is a categorical variable. Instruments have been designed to measure attitudes toward religion, including one that was used by L. L. Thurstone. This may be a particularly important consideration among people who have neutral attitudes, as it is more likely that prevailing social norms will influence the responses of such people on survey questions that effectively force respondents to categorize themselves either as belonging to a particular religion or belonging to no religion. A negative perception of atheists and pressure from family and peers may also cause some atheists to disassociate themselves from atheism. Misunderstanding of the term may also be a reason some label themselves differently.

For example, a Canadian poll released September 12, 2011 sampled 1,129 Canadian adults and collected data on the numbers of declared atheists.[15] These numbers conflicted with the latest Canadian census data that pre-supposed that a religious affiliation predisposed a belief in a deity and was based on a poorly worded question. A quote from the study:

The data also revealed some interesting facts about Canadians beliefs:

A study on personality and religiosity found that members of secular organizations (like the international Center for Inquiry) have similar personality profiles to members of religious groups. This study found that members of secular organizations are very likely to label themselves primarily as "atheists", but also very likely to consider themselves humanists.[17] It was also found that secular group members show no significant differences in their negative or positive affect. The surveyed individuals also had similar profiles for conscientiousness (discipline or impulse control, and acting on values like "pursuit of truth"). Secular group members tended to be less agreeable (e.g. more likely to hold unpopular, socially challenging views), as well as more open minded (e.g. more likely to consider new ideas) than members of religious groups. Luke Galen, a personality researcher, writes "Many previously reported characteristics associated with religiosity are a function not of belief itself, but of strong convictions and group identification."[17][18]

Though atheists are in the minority in most countries, they are relatively common in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and in former and present communist states. A 2012 Pew Research study found 16 percent of the global population to be unaffiliated with a religion.[19] It is difficult to determine actual atheist numbers. What is certain is that in some areas of the world (such as Europe and South America) atheism and secularization are increasing, and in other areas of the world (such as former Communist states like Russia), atheism is decreasing. This shifting data of these populations makes assessment difficult. Furthermore, the conflation of terms such as atheist, agnostic, non-religious and non-theist add to confusion among poll data.

Follow this link:

Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Atheism and obesity – Main Page – Conservapedia

Posted on by

From Conservapedia Two of the major risk factors for becoming obese according to the Mayo Clinic are poor dietary choices and inactivity.[1] According to the Gallup Inc., "Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious."[2]

(photo obtained from Flickr, see license agreement)

According to the Gallup Inc., "Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious."[3]

Gallup declared concerning the study which measured the degree to which religiosity affects health practices: "Generalized linear model analysis was used to estimate marginal scores all five reported metrics after controlling for age (in years), gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, education (number of years), log of income, and region of the country... Results are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index survey Jan. 2-July 28, 2010, with a random sample of 554,066 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, selected using random-digit-dial sampling."[4]

The Gallup study gives some insight into the above average health habits of the very religious and not necessarily the health habits of atheists. The reason is that the Gallup organization defines a non-religious as a person where "Religion is not an important part of daily life and church/synagogue/mosque attendance occurs seldom or never. This group constitutes 29.7% of the adult population."[5] While many Western atheists are non-religious, not all non-religious people are atheists.

Gallup further declares:

A 2010 study reported in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion found that for Korean women living in California, religion "may help prevent obesity."[7]

See also: Atheism and gluttony and Atheism and hedonism and Jesus Christ, the apostles and the Mediterranean diet/Mosaic diet

In the journal article Religion, self-regulation, and self-control: Associations, explanations, and implications, psychologists McCullough and Willoughby theorize that many of the positive links of religiousness with health and social behavior may be caused by religion's beneficial influences on self-control/self-regulation.[8][9] Furthermore, a 2012 Queen's University study published in Psychological Science found that religion replenishes self-control.[10][11] Also, numerous studies indicate that those who engage in regular spiritual practices have lower mortality rates.[12][13] See also: Atheism and hedonism

From a medical perspective, an obese person has accumulated enough body fat that it can have a negative effect on their health. If a person's weight is at least 20% higher than it should be, he/she is generally considered obese. If your Body Mass Index (BMI) is between 25 and 29.9 you are considered overweight.[15] If your BMI is 30 or over you are considered obese.[16] The term obese can also used in a more general way to indicate someone who is overweight.[17]

Visit link:

Atheism and obesity - Main Page - Conservapedia

Chapel Hill police: Parking dispute may have led to triple shooting

Posted on by

Chapel Hill, N.C. Chapel Hill police said Wednesday that an ongoing dispute over parkingmay have led to atriple shooting Tuesday night at a condominium complex on Summerwalk Circle.

Craig Stephen Hicks, 46, has been charged with first-degree murder in the deaths of Deah Shaddy Barakat, 23, his wife,Yusor Mohammad, 21,and her sister,Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha, 19.

Hicks turned himself in to the Chatham County Sheriffs Office in Pittsboro following the shooting, which happened in the Finley Forest complex off Barbee Chapel Road shortly after 5 p.m.

All threevictims were shot in the head, sources said.

The three victims were Muslim, and Hicks is not, according to posts about atheism on his Facebook page. In thousands of posts on social media, many have now questioned whether the victims' Islamic faith was a factor in the shooting.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation's largest civil advocacy group for Muslims, called on law enforcement officials Wednesday to address speculation about a motive for the killings.

"Based on the brutal nature of this crime, the past anti-religion statements of the alleged perpetrator, the religious attire of two of the victimsand the rising anti-Muslim rhetoric in American society, we urge state and federal law enforcement authorities to quickly address speculation of a possible bias motive in this case,"CAIRNational Executive DirectorNihadAwadsaid in a statement. "Our heartfelt condolences go to the families and loved ones of the victims and to the local community."

Police said Wednesday that they are looking into whatled to the "senseless and tragic act."

"We understand the concerns about the possibility that this was hate-motivated and we will exhaust every lead to determine if that is the case," Chapel Hill Police Chief Chris Blue said in a statement."Our thoughts are with the families and friends of these young people who lost their lives so needlessly."

U.S. Rep David Price, D-NC, released a statement Wednesday about the shooting, expressing his condolences to the community and referencing the possibility of the crime being motivated by bias.

Visit link:

Chapel Hill police: Parking dispute may have led to triple shooting

Chapel Hill killings shine light on particular tensions between Islam and atheism

Posted on by

The alleged assassination by an outspoken North Carolina atheist of three of his Muslim neighbors is shining a light on particular, deep tensions between two tiny American groups: Muslims and atheists.

Police in Chapel Hill Wednesday said they are only at the start of their probe into Craig Hicks life and what led up to Tuesday night, when he allegedly shot and killed husband and wifeDeah Barakat, 23, and Yusor Mohammad, 21, and Mohammads sister Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha. They said initial reports indicated that there was a dispute about parking but that their investigation continues.

Police arrested Hicks, 46, and charged him with the shootings. Hicks turned himself in without incident to theChatham County Sheriffs Office in nearby Pittsboro, Chatham County Sgt. Kevin Carey said Wednesday.

On Wednesday, the father of the two women said one of his daughters had mentioned Hicks before and felt he was anti-Muslim. A week ago, he said, she told her family she had a hateful neighbor.

Honest to God, she said, He hates us for what we are and how we look,Dr. Mohammad Abu-Salha, who has a psychiatry practice near Chapel Hill, told The News Observer.

Later on Wednesday, Hickss wife insisted that the shooting was only due to parking arguments and not to any bigotry. I can say with my absolute belief that this incident had nothing to do with religion or victims faith, but in fact was related to the long-standing parking disputes that my husband had with the neighbors. Karen Hicks said during a news conference.

But reports that an outspoken atheist most of Hicks many Facebook posts railed against religion had attacked a family who were visibly Muslim(the women wore headscarves) tapped immediately into a conversation that has been going on since Sept. 11 about why several of atheisms biggest figures havesingled out Islam for criticism.

Among them are biologist and writer Richard Dawkins and neuroscientistSam Harris, who have bothtriggered controversy with their comments about Islam.

For example, after the Paris attacks on magazine Charlie Hebdo, Dawkins tweeted that all religions are NOT equally violent. Some have never been violent, some gave it up centuries ago. One religion conspicuously didnt.

In an essay around the time of the controversy about a proposal to build a mosque near Ground Zero, Harris wrote that At this point in human history, Islam simply is different from other faiths, and that terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and the Taliban arent veering from the basic faith. If they are extremists who have deformed an ancient faith into a death cult, they havent deformed it by much. When one reads the Koran and thehadith, and consults the opinions of Muslim jurists over the centuries, one discovers that killing apostates, treating women like livestock, and waging jihadnot merely as an inner, spiritual struggle but as holy war against infidelsare practices that are central to the faith.

Visit link:

Chapel Hill killings shine light on particular tensions between Islam and atheism

How the Crises we are Facing on Earth today Might be the Best Thing Ever Happened to Humanity – Video

Posted on by


How the Crises we are Facing on Earth today Might be the Best Thing Ever Happened to Humanity
A conscious dialogue with David Christopher and the Living Consciously-TV cast about how the crises we are facing on Earth today might be the best thing ever...

By: Conscious Evolution Media

Here is the original post:

How the Crises we are Facing on Earth today Might be the Best Thing Ever Happened to Humanity - Video

Am I Crazy or have I just had a Spiritually Trans-formative Experience – Video

Posted on by


Am I Crazy or have I just had a Spiritually Trans-formative Experience
A conscious dialogue with Rosie Kuhn and the Living Consciously-TV cast about Am I crazy or have I just had a spiritually Trans-formative experience? http://...

By: Conscious Evolution Media

More here:

Am I Crazy or have I just had a Spiritually Trans-formative Experience - Video

Evolution – Conscious Evolution – The Co-Intelligence …

Posted on by

Conscious Evolution

Evolution is happening right now in and around us. It is influenced by all that we do and don't do, and all that we are and are not. Whether we are aware of it or not, we have a lot to do with how evolution unfolds, especially right here on Earth.

Recent offspring in life's 13.7 billion years of cosmic, planetary, biological and social evolution, we are on the leading edge of the evolutionary process. We share that emergent edge with everything else in the universe. (From an evolutionary perspective, "everything else in the universe" is actually better described by that scientifically accurate Native American phrase "all our relations.")

Evolution has given us a special kind of consciousness, one that creates -- and is thoroughly conditioned by -- our languages, cultures, stories, and built environments. This consciousness and its companion social systems and technologies have awesome power to shape the world. We are just beginning to grow into a mature way of manifesting it in the world.

Part of that maturing process is learning the dynamics through which evolution does its transformational work. Understanding those dynamics, we can apply them -- intentionally and wisely -- to transform ourselves and our social systems.

To the extent we do this, we are evolution -- or at least one significant facet of it -- becoming conscious of itself. Across many domains of society, life and spirituality, we are in the process of birthing ourselves as conscious evolution.

The unconsciousness with which we have been evolving as a civilization is taking us rapidly toward collective extinction -- following in the footsteps of the vast majority of "failed experiments" (extinct species) in Earth's history -- and taking many more with us. This century's evolutionary challenge -- to become a civilization capable of conscious evolution -- is not only what can "save" us, but also one of the most significant evolutionary leaps in human history.

All the crises of our age are manifestations of our challenge to consciously evolve. Co-intelligent conversation and democracy are fundamental to successfully transforming these crises into evolutionary breakthroughs.

Those of us who are coming to understand and welcome this challenge to become conscious evolutionary agents are discovering new sources of inspiration and meaning in it, and find ourselves working in community with truly remarkable companions.

Something is Emerging - brief notes on conscious evolution

See the rest here:

Evolution - Conscious Evolution - The Co-Intelligence ...

Conscious evolution – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted on by

Conscious evolution refers to the claim that humanity has now acquired the ability to choose what the species Homo Sapiens becomes in the future, based on recent advancements in science, medicine, technology, psychology, sociology, and spirituality. Conscious evolution assumes that human beings may be positioned at the crest of the ongoing evolution of the universe.

It has loose connections to integral theory, Spiral Dynamics, and noosphere thought. It is also sometimes connected to the theory of the global brain or collective consciousness.

Writers and thinkers on conscious evolution include Ervin Laszlo, Barbara Marx Hubbard, and Andrew Cohen. Tobias Tripler made some important contributions in his widely appraised treatise "Common Sense and other Things Mankind has not yet achieved", Fnord, 1991.

Conscious evolution suggests that humanity can choose advancement through co-operation and co-creation or self-destruction through separateness and competition.

In April 2014, Cardinal Gerhard Mller, prefect of the Catholic Church's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued a rebuke to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which represents the majority of U.S. nuns, for its promulgation of conscious evolution.

In the rebuke, he wrote: "The fundamental theses of conscious evolution are opposed to Christian Revelation and, when taken unreflectively, lead almost necessarily to fundamental errors regarding the omnipotence of God, the Incarnation of Christ, the reality of Original Sin, the necessity of salvation and the definitive nature of the salvific action of Christ in the Paschal Mystery."[1]

Soon after Mller's rebuke, the National Catholic Reporter issued a response by Barbara Marx Hubbard, whom Mller had mentioned in his remarks, in which she attempted to explain how the concept of conscious evolution is not, in fact, incompatible with Catholicism.[2]

More:

Conscious evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Conscious Evolution

Posted on by

Conscious Cultural Evolution Alexis Zeigler

Humanity is facing an environmental crisis of unprecedented proportions. We are facing a crises of social justice. Ever since the rise of civilization, we have been divided into rich and poor classes. Now the rise of food and energy prices, combined with the extreme concentration of wealth among the wealthiest of citizens can only bring increasing suffering and greater conflict.

What is the root cause of these problems? It is not "human nature" to be greedy, aggressive, or to disregard the future. The anthropological record is clear. We are capable of being altruistic or selfish, aggressive or compassionate. Many humans have lived in sustainable societies for thousands of years. We must correctly diagnose our current predicament, and have a rational, coherent plan for how to address it. This web page is dedicated to that purpose.

We have a new blog about Integrated Activism and Living Energy Farm. Check it out!

Books:

Integrated Activism: Applying the Hidden Connections Between Ecology, Economy, Politics and Social Progress, Alexis Zeigler Due to be released from North Atlantic Books in August, 2013 Available at online booksellers now!

Beyond Greenhype, Real Solutions for Global Warming, a book about by Alexis Zeigler You can download a PDF copy here

Downloads:

Donations for this work are accepted!

Go here to read the rest:

Conscious Evolution