New Atheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from New atheism)
Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox question.svg
 This article or section may contain previously unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (February 2012)
Part of a series on
Atheism
The Greek word "atheoi" ("[those who are] without God") as it appears on the early 3rd-century Papyrus 46
Concepts
History
Arguments for atheism
People
Related concepts

New Atheism is the name given to the ideas promoted by a collection of modern atheist writers who have advocated the view that "religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises."[1]

The term is commonly associated with individuals such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens (together called "the Four Horsemen of New Atheism" in a taped 2007 discussion they held on their criticisms of religion, a name that has stuck),[2] along with Victor J. Stenger,[3] Lawrence M. Krauss and A.C. Grayling.[4] Several best-selling books by these authors, published between 2004 and 2007, form the basis for much of the discussion of New Atheism.[5]

Contents

History [edit]

The 2004 publication of The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason by Sam Harris, a bestseller in the USA, marked the first of a series of popular bestsellers. Harris was motivated by the events of September 11, 2001, which he laid directly at the feet of Islam, while also directly criticizing Christianity and Judaism. Two years later Harris followed up with Letter to a Christian Nation, which was also a severe criticism of Christianity. Also in 2006, following his television documentary The Root of All Evil?, Richard Dawkins published The God Delusion, which was on the New York Times bestseller list for 51 weeks. Other milestone publications include Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett (2006); God: The Failed Hypothesis – How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist by Victor J. Stenger (2007); God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens (2007); Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam by Michel Onfray (2007); and Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists by Dan Barker (2008).

Referring to a 2007 dialogue taped by the BBC, Dawkins' website follows the BBC in referring to himself, Harris, Dennett, and Hitchens, as "The Four Horsemen", alluding to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.[6]

In a 2010 column entitled Why I Don't Believe in the New Atheism, Tom Flynn contends that what has been called "New Atheism" is neither a movement nor new, and that what was new was the publication of atheist material by big-name publishers, read by millions, and appearing on best-seller lists.[7]

Perspective [edit]

The New Atheists write mainly from a scientific perspective. Unlike previous writers, many of whom thought that science was indifferent, or even incapable of dealing with the "God" concept, Dawkins argues to the contrary, claiming the "God Hypothesis" is a valid scientific hypothesis,[8] having effects in the physical universe, and like any other hypothesis can be tested and falsified. Other New Atheists such as Victor Stenger propose that the personal Abrahamic God is a scientific hypothesis that can be tested by standard methods of science. Both Dawkins and Stenger conclude that the hypothesis fails any such tests,[9] and argue that naturalism is sufficient to explain everything we observe in the universe, from the most distant galaxies to the origin of life, species, and even the inner workings of the brain and consciousness. Nowhere, they argue, is it necessary to introduce God or the supernatural to understand reality. New Atheists have been associated with the argument from divine hiddenness and the idea that "absence of evidence is evidence of absence" when evidence can be expected.

Scientific testing of religion [edit]

The New Atheists assert that many religious or supernatural claims (such as the virgin birth of Jesus and the afterlife) are scientific claims in nature. They argue, for instance, that the issue of Jesus' supposed parentage is not a question of "values" or "morals", but a question of scientific inquiry.[10] The New Atheists believe science is now capable of investigating at least some, if not all, supernatural claims.[11] Institutions such as the Mayo Clinic and Duke University are attempting to find empirical support for the healing power of intercessory prayer.[12] According to Stenger, these experiments have found no evidence that intercessory prayer works.[13]

Logical arguments [edit]

Victor Stenger also argues in his book, God: The Failed Hypothesis, that a God having omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent attributes, which he termed a 3O God, cannot logically exist.[14] A similar series of logical disproofs of the existence of a God with various attributes can be found in Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier's The Impossibility of God,[15] or Theodore M. Drange's article, "Incompatible-Properties Arguments".[16]

Views on NOMA [edit]

The New Atheists are particularly critical of the two non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) view advocated by Stephen Jay Gould regarding the existence of a "domain where one form of teaching holds the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution."[17] In Gould's proposal, science and religion should be confined to distinct non-overlapping domains: science would be limited to the empirical realm, including theories developed to describe observations, while religion would deal with questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. The New Atheism leaders contend that NOMA does not describe empirical facts about the intersection of science and religion. In an article published in Free Inquiry magazine,[10] and later in his 2006 book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins writes that the Abrahamic religions constantly deal in scientific matters. Massimo Pigliucci, in his book Nonsense on Stilts, wrote that Gould attempted to redefine religion as moral philosophy. Matt Ridley notes that religion does more than talk about ultimate meanings and morals, and science is not proscribed from doing the same. After all, morals involve human behavior, an observable phenomenon, and science is the study of observable phenomena. Ridley notes that there is substantial scientific research on evolutionary origins of ethics and morality.[18]

Criticisms [edit]

Cardinal William Levada believes that New Atheism has misrepresented the doctrines of the church.[19] He described New Atheism as "aggressive", and he believed it to be the primary source of discrimination against Christians.[20]

The theologians Jeffrey Robbins and Christopher Rodkey take issue with what they regard as "the evangelical nature of the new atheism, which assumes that it has a Good News to share, at all cost, for the ultimate future of humanity by the conversion of as many people as possible." They believe they have found similarities between new atheism and evangelical Christianity and conclude that the all-consuming nature of both "encourages endless conflict without progress" between both extremities.[21] Sociologist William Stahl said "What is striking about the current debate is the frequency with which the New Atheists are portrayed as mirror images of religious fundamentalists." [22]

Some commentators have accused the New Atheist movement of Islamophobia.[23][24][25][26] Wade Jacoby and Hakan Yavuz assert that "a group of 'new atheists' such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens" have "invoked Samuel Huntington's 'clash of civilizations' theory to explain the current political contestation" and that this forms part of a trend toward "Islamophobia [...] in the study of Muslim societies".[27] William W. Emilson argues that "the 'new' in the new atheists' writings is not their aggressiveness, nor their extraordinary popularity, nor even their scientific approach to religion, rather it is their attack not only on militant Islamism but also on Islam itself under the cloak of its general critique of religion".[28]

See also [edit]

Portal icon Atheism portal
Portal icon Philosophy of science portal
Portal icon Social movements portal
Portal icon Religion portal

References [edit]

  1. ^ Hooper, Simon. "The rise of the New Atheists". CNN. Retrieved 2010-03-16. 
  2. ^ Gribbin, Alice (December 22, 2011). "Preview: The Four Horsemen of New Atheism reunited". New Statesman. Retrieved February 13, 2012. 
  3. ^ What’s New About The New Atheism? Victor Stenger answers the question, Philosophy Now, April/May 2010.
  4. ^ The "New Atheists" are responding to provocation, not mounting an arbitrary attack
  5. ^ Stenger, Victor J. "The New Atheism". Colorado University. Retrieved 2009-07-23. 
  6. ^ "The Four Horsemen" at the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
  7. ^ Flynn, Tom (2010). Why I Don't Believe in the New Atheism. Retrieved 2011-07-28. 
  8. ^ Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2008)
  9. ^ Stenger, 2008
  10. ^ a b Richard Dawkins. "When Religion Steps on Science's Turf : The Alleged Separation Between the Two Is Not So Tidy", Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 18, Number 2
  11. ^ Yonatan Fishman. Can Science Test Supernatural Worldviews?
  12. ^ Supernatural Science, Victor J. Stenger, published in mukto-mona
  13. ^ Victor Stenger, The New Atheism, page 70
  14. ^ Victor Stenger, God the Failed Hypothesis, Chap 1
  15. ^ Michael Martin Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier, The Impossibility of God, Prometheus Books, 2003)
  16. ^ Philo 1998 (2), pp. 49–60
  17. ^ Stephen Jay Gould, Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life, The Library of Contemporary Thought (New York: Ballantine Pub. Group, 1999)
  18. ^ Matt Ridley, The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation, (Penguin, 1998)
  19. ^ "Catholics need a 'new apologetics' to defend faith". The Catholic Leader. Retrieved 2 November 2012. 
  20. ^ Nick Squires and Martin Beckford. "Pope visit: Cardinal drops out after calling UK 'Third World". The Telegraph. Retrieved 2 November 2012. 
  21. ^ Jeffrey Robbins and Christopher Rodkey (2010). "Beating 'God' to Death: Radical Theology and the New Atheism". In Amarnath Amarasingam. Religion and the New Atheism A Critical Appraisal. Haymarket Books. p. 35. ISBN 9781608462032. 
  22. ^ William Stahl (2010). "One-Dimensional Rage: The Social Epistemology of the New Atheism and Fundamentalism". In Amarnath Amarasingam. Religion and the New Atheism A Critical Appraisal. Haymarket Books. pp. 97–108. ISBN 9781608462032. 
  23. ^ Jerome Taylor. "Atheists Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris face Islamophobia backlash". The Independent. Retrieved April 16, 2013.
  24. ^ FP Staff. "Unholy war: Atheists and the politics of Muslim-baiting". First Post. Retrieved April 16, 2013.
  25. ^ Jacoby, Wade; Yavuz, Hakan (April 2008). "Modernization, Identity and Integration: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Islam in Europe". Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 28 (1): 1. 
  26. ^ Emilsen, William (August 2012). "The New Atheism and Islam". The Expository Times 123 (11): 521. 
  27. ^ Jacoby, Wade; Yavuz, Hakan (April 2008). "Modernization, Identity and Integration: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Islam in Europe". Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 28 (1): 1. 
  28. ^ Emilsen, William (August 2012). "The New Atheism and Islam". The Expository Times 123 (11): 521. 
Atheism
Agnosticism
Nontheism
Naturalism
Related topics
Major groups
Historical
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Atheism&oldid=553381188"