Jump to content

Criticism of atheism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Reverted 1 edit by 24.94.18.234 (talk): We need to choose our wording carefully here. Quoting Harris like this is probably not appropriate. Please discuss first. (TW)
Removed the quotation from Harris until further discussion.
Line 90: Line 90:


Professor of [[Anthropology]] and [[Sociology]] Jack David Eller believes that the four principal New Atheist authors (Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris) do not offer anything new in terms of arguments to disprove the existence of gods. He also criticizes them for their focus on the dangers of theism, as opposed to the falsifying of theism, which results in mischaracterizing religions; taking local theisms as the essence of religion itself, and for focusing on the negative aspects of religion in the form of an "argument from benefit" in the reverse.<ref>{{cite book|last=Eller|first=Jack|title=Atheism and Secularity Vol.1: Issues, Concepts, Definitions|year=2010|publisher=Praeger|isbn=9780313351839|editor=Phil Zuckerman|page=14-15|chapter=What Is Atheism?}}</ref>
Professor of [[Anthropology]] and [[Sociology]] Jack David Eller believes that the four principal New Atheist authors (Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris) do not offer anything new in terms of arguments to disprove the existence of gods. He also criticizes them for their focus on the dangers of theism, as opposed to the falsifying of theism, which results in mischaracterizing religions; taking local theisms as the essence of religion itself, and for focusing on the negative aspects of religion in the form of an "argument from benefit" in the reverse.<ref>{{cite book|last=Eller|first=Jack|title=Atheism and Secularity Vol.1: Issues, Concepts, Definitions|year=2010|publisher=Praeger|isbn=9780313351839|editor=Phil Zuckerman|page=14-15|chapter=What Is Atheism?}}</ref>

Agnostic writer [[Mark Vernon]], compares [[New Atheism]] with [[Religious Fundamentalism]] where the leaders of both groups show little tolerance for schools of thoughts they do not approve of. He believes humility is a necessary element of any sound philosophy and whenever this check on pride is removed, the intoxication for power will lead to a vast social disaster.<ref>Religion and the New Atheism: A Critical Appraisal, pp. 225-231. Afterword by Mark Vernon</ref><ref>An earlier version of the article by Mark Vernon appeared in the CAESAR: A Journal of Religion and Human Values, Vol 1, 2008.</ref>


== See also ==
== See also ==

Revision as of 17:43, 11 October 2012

Part of a series on
Atheism
Concepts
History
Society
Arguments
Arguments for atheism
People
Lists of atheists
Books
Related stances
Irreligion
Atheism and religion
Main article: Atheism

Criticism of atheism is criticism of the concepts, validity, or impact of atheism, including associated political and social implications. Criticism of atheism is complicated by the fact that there exist multiple definitions and concepts of atheism (and little consensus among fellow atheists), including practical atheism, theoretical atheism, negative and positive atheism, implicit and explicit atheism, and strong and weak atheism, with critics not always specifying the subset of atheism being criticized.

Criticism includes arguments based on theistic positions, and arguments pertaining to morality or what are thought to be the effects of atheism on the individual.

Definitions and concepts of atheism

Atheism is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities,[1] the position that there are no deities,[2] or the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3][4]

Atheists cite a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities.[5] Rationales for not believing in any deity include the problem of evil, the argument from inconsistent revelations, and the argument from nonbelief. Other arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. In general, atheists regard the arguments for the existence of God as unconvincing or flawed.[6]

Agnostic atheists contend that there are insufficient grounds for strong atheism, the position that no deities exist,[7] but still reject theistic claims.

Ignostics propose that every other theological position (including agnosticism and atheism) assumes too much about the concept of God and that the question of the existence of God is meaningless.

Atheism and the individual

Blaise Pascal first explained his wager in Pensées (1669)

In his Pensées, Blaise Pascal criticizes atheists for not seeing signs of God's will.[8] He also formulated Pascal's Wager, which posits that there's more to be gained from wagering on the existence of God than from atheism, and that a rational person should live as though God exists, even though the truth of the matter can't actually be known. Criticism of Pascal's Wager began in his own day, and came from both staunch atheists, and the religious orthodoxy. A common objection to Pascal's wager was noted by Voltaire, known as the argument from inconsistent revelations. Voltaire rejected the notion that the wager was 'proof of god' as "indecent and childish", adding, "the interest I have to believe a thing is no proof that such a thing exists."[9]

An article in the American Journal of Psychiatry in 2004 suggested that atheists might have a higher suicide rate than theists.[10] According to William Bainbridge, atheism is common among people whose social obligations are weak and is also connected to lower fertility rates in some industrial nations.[11] Extended length of sobriety in alcohol recovery is related positively to higher levels of theistic belief, active community helping, and self-transcendence.[12] Some studies state that in developed countries, health, life expectancy, and other correlates of wealth, tend to be statistical predictors of a greater percentage of atheists, compared to countries with higher proportions of believers.[13][14] Multiple methodological problems have been identified with cross-national assessments of religiosity, secularity, and social health which undermine conclusive statements on religiosity and secularity in developed democracies. [15]

Morality

See also: Morality without religion, Euthyphro dilemma, and Divine command theory

The Dalai Lama believes that morality stems from the individual instead of from God. The Catholic Church believes that morality is ensured through natural law but that religion provides a more solid foundation.[16]

For many years in the United States, atheists were not allowed to testify in court because it was believed that an atheist would have no reason to tell the truth (see also discrimination against atheists).[17]

The Dalai Lama has said that compassion and affection are human values independent of religion: "We need these human values. I call these secular ethics, secular beliefs. There’s no relationship with any particular religion. Even without religion, even as nonbelievers, we have the capacity to promote these things."[18] Atheists such as biologist and popular author Richard Dawkins have proposed that human morality is a result of evolutionary, sociobiological history. He proposes that the "moral zeitgeist" helps describe how moral imperatives and values naturalistically evolve over time from biological and cultural origins.[19]

Natural law provides a foundation on which people may build moral rules to guide their choices and regulate society, but does not provide as strong a basis for moral behavior as a morality that is based in religion.[20] Douglas Wilson, an evangelical theologian, argues that while atheists can behave morally, belief is necessary for an individual "to give a rational and coherent account" of why they are obligated to lead a morally responsible life.[21] Wilson says that atheism is unable to "give an account of why one deed should be seen as good and another as evil" (emphasis in original).[22] Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, outgoing Archbishop of Westminster, expressed this position by describing a lack of faith as “the greatest of evils” and blamed atheism for war and destruction, implying that it was a "greater evil even than sin itself."[23]

Atheism as faith

Further information: Secular religion and nontheistic religions

Another criticism of atheism is that it is a faith in itself, as a belief in its own right, with a certainty about the falseness of religious beliefs that is comparable to the certainty about the unknown that is practiced by religions themselves.[24][25][26][27][28] Journalist Rod Liddle and theologian Aliester McGrath assert that some atheists are dogmatic.[29][30]

A response to this criticism is to emphasize that atheism can be the rejection of belief, or absence of belief.[31][32][33][34][35] This argument can be summarized by reference to Don Hirschberg's saying, "calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."[36]

A belief is not necessarily a belief without evidence or firm foundation. For example a belief can be in contrast to faith because the holder of the belief might not hold it with a complete degree of being certain it is true but only as far as the evidence pertains to the belief being true.[37]

In his book First Principles (1862), the 19th-century English philosopher and sociologist Herbert Spencer has a chapter on "Ultimate Religious Ideas" in which he writes that, as regards the origin of the universe, three hypotheses are possible: self-existence (atheism), self-creation (pantheism) or creation by an external agency (theism).[38] Analyzing these three hypotheses, however, Spencer finds that, "differing so widely as they seem to do", they all "contain the same ultimate element. It is impossible to avoid making the assumption of self-existence somewhere",[39] whether with regard to a part of the universe (atheism), the universe as a whole (pantheism), or an external creator (theism). Furthermore, the idea of self-existence is not merely inescapable but "rigorously inconceivable; and this holds true whatever be the nature of the object of which it is predicated". For Spencer, therefore, atheism, pantheism and theism alike, despite "seeming to their adherents quite rational, turn out, when critically examined, to be literally unthinkable".[40] In view of its inability to evade assuming self-existence somewhere, "even that which is commonly regarded as the negation of all religion — even positive Atheism comes within the definition" of religion.[41]

Jack David Eller, an anthropologist, has noted that most cultures do not have beliefs in gods and stated, "Surprisingly, atheism is not the opposite or lack, let alone the enemy or religion, but is the most common form of religion." (Italics his) [42]

Catholic perspective

The Catechism of the Catholic Church identifies atheism as a violation of the First Commandment, calling it "a sin against the virtue of religion". The catechism is careful to acknowledge that atheism may be motivated by virtuous or moral considerations, and admonishes Catholic Christians to focus on their own role in encouraging atheism by their religious or moral shortcomings:

(2125) [...] The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion.[43]

Atheism and politics

See also: Persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union and Religious views of Adolf Hitler

Pope Benedict XVI has spoken out against atheism, stating in 2010:

As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the 20th century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a "reductive vision of the person and his destiny"[44]

Some totalitarian regimes, like the USSR and the North Korean government, had atheistic and antitheistic beliefs. However, Richard Dawkins pointed out that Hitler was a Roman Catholic,[45] that Hitler made public speeches affirming his belief in Christianity,[46] and that the statehood of the Holy See is "founded on a Faustian deal in which Benito Mussolini handed over 1.2 square miles of central Rome in exchange for church support of his fascist regime", and he also pointed out that:

Hitler certainly was not an atheist. In 1933 he claimed to have "stamped atheism out", having banned most of Germany's atheist organisations, including the German Freethinkers League whose building was then turned into an information bureau for church affairs.

In Nazi Germany it was Hitler's intention to instate Ludwig Müller, a strong supporter of the Nazi party since the 1920s, as the Reichsbishop of the German Evangelical Church. [47] As part of the Nazi Gleichschaltung, the Nazi regime's plan was to "coordinate" all 28 separate Protestant regional church bodies into a single and unitary Reich Church (German: Reichskirche). Müller wanted to serve as the Reich's bishop (German: Reichsbischof) of this newly formed entity.[48]

Some researches suggest that atheists are more numerous in peaceful nations than they are in turbulent or warlike ones, but causality of this trend is not clear and there are many outliers.[49] However, opponents of this view cite examples such as the Bolsheviks (in Soviet Russia) who were inspired by "an ideological creed which professed that all religion would atrophy ... resolved to eradicate Christianity as such".[50] In 1918 "[t]en Orthodox hierarchs were summarily shot" and "[c]hildren were deprived of any religious education outside the home."[50] Increasingly draconian measures were employed. In addition to direct state persecution, the League of the Militant Godless was founded in 1925, churches were closed and vandalized and "by 1938 eighty bishops had lost their lives, while thousands of clerics were sent to labour camps."[51]

In 1967, Enver Hoxha's regime conducted a campaign to extinguish religious life in Albania; by year's end over two thousand religious buildings were closed or converted to other uses, and religious leaders were imprisoned and executed. Albania was declared to be the world's first atheist country by its leaders, and Article 37 of the Albanian constitution of 1976 stated that "The State recognises no religion, and supports and carries out atheistic propaganda in order to implant a scientific materialistic world outlook in people."[52][53]

Evangelical Christian writer Dinesh D'Souza writes that "The crimes of atheism have generally been perpetrated through a hubristic ideology that sees man, not God, as the creator of values. Using the latest techniques of science and technology, man seeks to displace God and create a secular utopia here on earth."[54] He also contends:

And who can deny that Stalin and Mao, not to mention Pol Pot and a host of others, all committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was explicitly atheistic? Who can dispute that they did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a 'new man' and a religion-free utopia? These were mass murders performed with atheism as a central part of their ideological inspiration, they were not mass murders done by people who simply happened to be atheist.[55]

In response to this line of criticism, Sam Harris wrote:

The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.[56]

Richard Dawkins has stated that Stalin's atrocities were influenced not by atheism but by dogmatic Marxism,[19] and concludes that while Stalin and Mao happened to be atheists, they did not do their deeds in the name of atheism.[57] On other occasions, Dawkins has replied to the argument that Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin were antireligious with the response that Hitler and Stalin also grew moustaches, in an effort to show the argument as fallacious.[58] Instead, Dawkins argues in The God Delusion that "What matters is not whether Hitler and Stalin were atheists, but whether atheism systematically influences people to do bad things. There is not the smallest evidence that it does."[59] D'Souza responds that an individual need not explicitly invoke atheism in committing atrocities if it is already implied in his worldview, as is the case in Marxism.[55]

New Atheism

Robert Wright has argued that some New Atheists discourage looking for deeper root causes of conflicts when they assume that religion is the sole root of the problem. Wright argues that this can discourage people from working to change the circumstances that actually give rise to those conflicts.[60] Mark Chaves has said that the New Atheists, amongst others who comment on religions, have committed the religious congruence fallacy in their writings, by assuming that beliefs and practices remain static and coherent through time. He believes that Hitchens has committed this error by assuming that the drive for congruence is a defining feature of religion, and that Dennett has done it by overlooking the fact that religious actions are dependent on the situation, just like other actions.[61]

Professor of Anthropology and Sociology Jack David Eller believes that the four principal New Atheist authors (Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris) do not offer anything new in terms of arguments to disprove the existence of gods. He also criticizes them for their focus on the dangers of theism, as opposed to the falsifying of theism, which results in mischaracterizing religions; taking local theisms as the essence of religion itself, and for focusing on the negative aspects of religion in the form of an "argument from benefit" in the reverse.[62]

Agnostic writer Mark Vernon, compares New Atheism with Religious Fundamentalism where the leaders of both groups show little tolerance for schools of thoughts they do not approve of. He believes humility is a necessary element of any sound philosophy and whenever this check on pride is removed, the intoxication for power will lead to a vast social disaster.[63][64]

See also

2

References

  1. ^ *Nielsen, Kai (2011). "Atheism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 2011-12-06. for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God... because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers... because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance—e.g., "God" is just another name for love, or ... a symbolic term for moral ideals. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
    • Edwards, Paul (2005) [1967]. "Atheism". In Donald M. Borchert (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). MacMillan Reference USA (Gale). p. 359. ISBN 978-0-02-865780-6. an 'atheist' is a person who rejects belief in God, regardless of whether or not his reason for the rejection is the claim that 'God exists' expresses a false proposition. People frequently adopt an attitude of rejection toward a position for reasons other than that it is a false proposition. It is common among contemporary philosophers, and indeed it was not uncommon in earlier centuries, to reject positions on the ground that they are meaningless. Sometimes, too, a theory is rejected on such grounds as that it is sterile or redundant or capricious, and there are many other considerations which in certain contexts are generally agreed to constitute good grounds for rejecting an assertion. {{cite encyclopedia}}: |volume= has extra text (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)(page 175 in 1967 edition)
  2. ^ Rowe, William L. (1998). "Atheism". In Edward Craig (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-07310-3. Retrieved 2011-04-09. atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. Another meaning of "atheism" is simply nonbelief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God. ...an atheist, in the broader sense of the term, is someone who disbelieves in every form of deity, not just the God of traditional Western theology. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  3. ^ Simon Blackburn, ed. (2008). "atheism". The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (2008 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved 2011-12-05. Either the lack of belief that there exists a god, or the belief that there exists none.
  4. ^ "atheism". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 2012-04-09.
  5. ^ Various authors. "Logical Arguments for Atheism". Internet Infidels, The Secular Web Library. Retrieved 2007-APR-09.
  6. ^ See e.g. Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Ch.3: Bantam Books. ISBN 0-618-68000-4. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)CS1 maint: location (link) and Harris, Sam (2005). The End of Faith. W.W. Norton. Retrieved 2012-06-09. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  7. ^ Anthony Kenny What I Believe see esp. Ch. 3 "Why I am not an atheist"
  8. ^ Pascal, Blaise; Ariew, Roger (2005). Pensées. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Co. p. 51. ISBN 978-0-87220-717-2. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  9. ^ Remarques sur les Pensees de Pascal XI
  10. ^ PsychiatryOnline | American Journal of Psychiatry | Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt
  11. ^ Bainbridge, William (2005). "Atheism" (PDF). Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion. 1 (Article 2): 1–26.
  12. ^ Zemore, SE (2004 May). "Helping, spirituality and Alcoholics Anonymous in recovery". Journal of studies on alcohol. 65 (3): 383–91. PMID 15222595. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  13. ^ Paul, Gregory. 2002. The Secular Revolution of the West, Free Inquiry, Summer: 28–34
  14. ^ Zuckerman, P. (2007). M. Martin (ed.). [url=http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=tAeFipOVx4MC&oi=fnd&pg=PA11&ots=KhsfEfpZ0W&sig=CoVGalSuqtn9O1PDG8WNegDjTF8#v=snippet&f=false The Cambridge Companion to Atheism] (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 58. ISBN 0-521-84270-0. In sum, with the exception of suicide, countries marked by high rates of organic atheism are among the most societally healthy on earth, while societies characterized by nonexistent rates of organic atheism are among the most unhealthy. Of course, none of the above correlations demonstrate that high levels of organic atheism cause societal health or that low levels of organic atheism cause societal ills. Rather, societal health seems to cause widespread atheism, and societal insecurity seems to cause widespread belief in God, as has been demonstrated by Norris and Inglehart (2004), mentioned above. {{cite book}}: Check |url= value (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Missing pipe in: |url= (help)
  15. ^ Moreno-Riaño, Gerson; Smith, Mark Caleb; Mach, Thomas (2006). "Religiosity, Secularism, and Social Health" (PDF). Journal of Religion and Society. 8. Cedarville University.
  16. ^ Josef Cardinal Ratzinger, Marcello Pera, "Without Roots: The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam" (Basic Books, 0465006345, 2006).
  17. ^ See, e.g., United States v. Miller, 236 F. 798, 799 (W.D. Wash., N.D. 1916) (citing Thurston v. Whitney et al., 2 Cush. (Mass.) 104; Jones on Evidence, Blue Book, vol. 4, §§ 712, 713) ("Under the common-law rule a person who does not believe in a God who is the rewarder of truth and the avenger of falsehood cannot be permitted to testify.")
  18. ^ "The Dalai Lama Interview | The Progressive Magazine since 1909". Progressive.org. 1935-07-06. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  19. ^ a b Dawkins, Richard (2006-09-18). The God Delusion. Ch. 7: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-0-618-68000-9. Retrieved 2012-06-09. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)CS1 maint: location (link)
  20. ^ "Where morality is divorced from religion, reason will, it is true, enable a man to recognize to a large extent the ideal to which his nature points. But much will be wanting. He will disregard some of his most essential duties. He will, further, be destitute of the strong motives for obedience to the law afforded by the sense of obligation to God and the knowledge of the tremendous sanction attached to its neglect – motives which experience has proved to be necessary as a safeguard against the influence of the passions. And, finally, his actions even if in accordance with the moral law, will be based not on the obligation imposed by the Divine will, but on considerations of human dignity and on the good of human society."Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Morality" . Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
  21. ^ Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson, "Is Christianity Good for the World? Part 2"[dead link] Christianity Today magazine (web only, May 2007)
  22. ^ Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson, "Is Christianity Good for the World? Part 6"[dead link] Christianity Today magazine (web only, May 2007)
  23. ^ Gledhill, Ruth (May 22, 2009). "Archbishop of Westminster attacks atheism but says nothing on child abuse". The Times (London).[dead link]
  24. ^ David Limbaugh, "Does atheism require more faith?," Townhall.com, April 20, 2004
  25. ^ Stanley Fish, "Atheism and Evidence," Think Again, The New York Times, June 17, 2007
  26. ^ DHRUV K. SINGHAL, "The Church of Atheism,", The Harvard Crimson, December 14, 2008
  27. ^ Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist," Crossway Books, March 01, 2004, 447 Pages, ISBN 1-58134-561-5
  28. ^ John F. Haught, God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens, Westminster John Knox Press, December 31, 2007, 156 pages, ISBN 978-0-664-23304-4, page 45
  29. ^ Johns, Ian (2006). "Atheism gets a kick in the fundamentals". London: The Times.[dead link]
  30. ^ Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath, The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SPCK), February 15, 2007, ISBN 978-0-281-05927-0
  31. ^ Martin, Michael. The Cambridge Companion to Atheism[dead link]. Cambridge University Press. 2006. ISBN 0-521-84270-0.
  32. ^ Nielsen, Kai (2009). "Atheism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  33. ^ Edwards, Paul (1967). "Atheism". The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. Vol. 1. Collier-MacMillan. p. 175. {{cite encyclopedia}}: |volume= has extra text (help)
  34. ^ Cline, Austin (2006). "What Is the Definition of Atheism?". about.com. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  35. ^ Flew, Antony (1984). God, Freedom, and Immortality: A Critical Analysis. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus. ISBN 0-87975-127-4.
  36. ^ "Quotations : Atheism, Atheist. Quotes of Asimov, Allen, Buchan, Chesterton, Crisp, Goldman, Roberts, Rossetti, Santayana, Sartre, Vidal". Atheisme.free.fr. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  37. ^ Belief
  38. ^ Spencer, Herbert (1862). First Principles. London: Williams and Norgate, pp. 30-35.
  39. ^ Spencer, First Principles, p. 36.
  40. ^ Spencer, First Principles, p. 35.
  41. ^ Spencer, First Principles, p. 43.
  42. ^ Eller, Jack (2010). "What Is Atheism?". In Phil Zuckerman (ed.). Atheism and Secularity Vol.1: Issues, Concepts, Definitions. Praeger. p. 3. ISBN 9780313351839.
  43. ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church, English version, section 3.2.1.1.3
  44. ^ Pope Benedict XVI. "Meeting with state authorities in the grounds of the Palace of Holyroodhouse". Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  45. ^ Dawkins, Richard (2010-09-22). "Ratzinger is an enemy of humanity". The Guardian. London.
  46. ^ ^ a b Baynes, Norman H., ed. (1969). The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939. New York: Howard Fertig. pp. 19-20, 37, 240, 370, 371, 375, 378, 382, 383, 385-388, 390-392, 398-399, 402, 405-407, 410, 1018, 1544, 1594.
  47. ^ The entire old-Prussian church (both Müller and Bodelschwingh were members of this largest regional church) was placed under police jurisdiction; pastors were fired, suspended and sometimes arrested; and the German Christians and Müller carried on a vicious campaign against Bodelschwingh.Barnett p. 34.
  48. ^ Shirer p. 237
  49. ^ Tom Rees. Atheist nations are more peaceful, Epiphenom.com. Retrieved September 16, 2010
  50. ^ a b Michael Burleigh Sacred Causes HarperCollins (2006) p41, p42, p43
  51. ^ Burleigh op. cit. p49 and p47
  52. ^ Elsie, R. (2000). A Dictionary of Albanian Religion, Mythology, and Folk Culture. New York: NYU Press. p. 18. ISBN 0-8147-2214-8. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  53. ^ David Binder, "Evolution in Europe; Albanian Leader Says the Country Will Be Democratized but Will Retain Socialism," The New York Times, May 14, 1990
  54. ^ Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history Dinesh D'Souza
  55. ^ a b Answering Atheist’s Arguments Dinesh D'Souza
  56. ^ 10 myths and 10 truths about Atheism Sam Harris
  57. ^ Interview with Richard Dawkins conducted by Stephen Sackur for BBC News 24’s HardTalk programme, July 24th 2007. [1]
  58. ^ The Video: Bill O'Reilly Interviews Richard Dawkins
  59. ^ Dawkins 2006, p. 309 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFDawkins2006 (help)
  60. ^ Wright, Robert. "The Trouble with the New Atheists: Part II". Huffington Post.
  61. ^ Chaves, Mark (2010). "SSSR Presidential Address Rain Dances in the Dry Season: Overcoming the Religious Congruence Fallacy". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 49 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01489.x.
  62. ^ Eller, Jack (2010). "What Is Atheism?". In Phil Zuckerman (ed.). Atheism and Secularity Vol.1: Issues, Concepts, Definitions. Praeger. p. 14-15. ISBN 9780313351839.
  63. ^ Religion and the New Atheism: A Critical Appraisal, pp. 225-231. Afterword by Mark Vernon
  64. ^ An earlier version of the article by Mark Vernon appeared in the CAESAR: A Journal of Religion and Human Values, Vol 1, 2008.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_atheism&oldid=517237684"