New atheism: Difference between revisions
Jbolden1517 (talk | contribs) →Further reading: Kurtz link |
No edit summary Tag: references removed |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''New atheism''' is a form of [[atheism]] that takes a positive position on the non-existence of God. It is characterized by not just seeing religion as factually false, but destructive. This is contrasted with [[Victorianism|Victorian]] atheism, which mourned that belief was no longer possible; new atheism |
'''New atheism''' is a form of [[atheism]] that takes a positive position on the non-existence of God. It is characterized by not just seeing religion as factually false, but destructive. This is contrasted with [[Victorianism|Victorian]] atheism, which mourned that belief was no longer possible; new atheism celebrates freedom from God. It appears the term was coined by [[Wired (magazine)|Wired magazine]] in their article ''The Church of the Non-Believers'' <ref name="guardian-article">Brown, Andrew. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2008/dec/29/religion-new-atheism-defined "The New Atheism, a definition and a quiz"], ''The Guardian'', December 29, 2008. <!-- accessed March 16, 2009 --></ref><ref name="wired-article">Wolf, Gary. [http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.11/atheism.html "The Church of Non-Believers"], ''Wired'', issue 14.11, November 2006 <!-- accessed March 16, 2009 --></ref>. |
||
==Doctrines == |
==Doctrines == |
Revision as of 19:59, 2 April 2009
New atheism is a form of atheism that takes a positive position on the non-existence of God. It is characterized by not just seeing religion as factually false, but destructive. This is contrasted with Victorian atheism, which mourned that belief was no longer possible; new atheism celebrates freedom from God. It appears the term was coined by Wired magazine in their article The Church of the Non-Believers [1][2].
Doctrines
Andrew Brown
Andrew Brown of the Guardian[1] attempted to define New Atheism in terms of 6 doctrines:
- There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
- The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't.
- Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason.
- In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm.
- Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature.
- Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
Al Mohler
Al Mohler in his lecture at Dallas[3] also provides a theory of development of what led to the distinctiveness from the victorian atheism or its later cousin logical positivism. In his view this came from the evolution, older atheism was focused on theodicy most powerfully from the wars of the early twentieth century and the holocaust. That is it arose in cultural Christian states. New atheism comes from attitudes first developed out of the world's first atheist state, the soviet union. These attitudes became part of Western European and American society came via. the secularization of the state and society where the ownership of land, social services (legal, medical...) were being provided by not explicitly religious institutions. Additional cultural changes occurred with the rise of social dislocation, loss of extended family, secularization of elites, personal autonomy and therapeutic culture. [4] Older atheism saw belief in God as functional (comfort, social cohesion...) and that as they are no longer necessary history would inevitably drive towards the forms without the need for the cause as "humanity came of age". For the new atheists, the triumphs of science lead to a belief that God is not necessary, moreover the very foundation of theism are denied by postmodernism as God because one socially constructed reality among others. Mohler believes that for the western elite was a progress from belief in God being absolutely unquestioning during the middle ages, to disbelief being plausible from the enlightenment and modernity to in the modern era belief no longer being plausible.
At the same Dallas lecture Mohler indicated a list of distinctive features:[3]
- New Atheism is a celebration of atheism. God's funeral is something to be celebrated not mourned.
- Not a rejection of a theism but an unambiguous rejection of the God of Christianity.
- Explicitly based in scientific arguments. Motivation and structure is considered to an inevitable result of scientific revolution and method.
- Accommodation of theism to modern forms of thought is no longer seen as progress so new atheist literature attacks are focused on moderate and liberal forms of theism at least as strongly as orthodox and conservative forms of theism.
- Belief in God is not to be tolerated. This contrasts with the older atheism's focus on plurality and freedom of religion.
- A view that inculcating is a belief in God in children is harmful to them.
- Religion is greatest threat to world peace.
See also
- Books by New Atheists on New Atheism
- Sam Harris, The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation
- Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
- Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great
- Daniel Dennett, Breaking the Spell
References
- ^ a b Brown, Andrew. "The New Atheism, a definition and a quiz", The Guardian, December 29, 2008.
- ^ Wolf, Gary. "The Church of Non-Believers", Wired, issue 14.11, November 2006
- ^ a b Cite error: The named reference
Dallas
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Therapeutic culture edited by Jonathan B. Imber
Further reading
- Wired Magazine - The Church of the Non-Believers
- The Nation, The New Atheists and Among the Disbelievers
- CNN, The rise of the "New Atheists"
- Al Mohler, The New Atheism? and lecture at Dallas Theological Seminary, The New Atheism And The Endgame Of Secularism
- A. J. Chein, Institute for Health and Social Justice, The New Atheism, online at Z-Net
- Paul Kurtz, Council for Secular Humanism ,Are ‘Evangelical Atheists’ Too Outspoken?