The petering out of "new atheism" or how Dawkins is so yesterday

[AerchAngel]

The problem with atheism is the same problem with religion. Certainty. That can at times breed arrogance. If atheists are turning more understanding and accepting, then their numbers will shoot up. My generation is already turned off to the church.

It has already shot up, just people don't talk about it.

And your first statement has nailed it. No one is certain, only those who believe/non believe is more important to that answer as either side can't really answer that question nor shouldn't or you would go insane figuring it out. Live your life the way you want and be respectful toward others. You don't have to agree with and respect their opinions. Both Atheists and Christians can do this instead of fighting. If those who want to not believe that is their choice and vice-versa, there is no need to fear what the other is doing or saying, you are responsible for live here on Earth and those you touch.

 

[Dalyn]

The problem with atheism is the same problem with religion. Certainty. That can at times breed arrogance. If atheists are turning more understanding and accepting, then their numbers will shoot up. My generation is already turned off to the church.

There is very little--perhaps nothing--I am certain about.

 

[57Brave]

I can't see a Christian fearing an atheist because if he did he is no Christian to be honest, because he has betrayed his belief.

That being the case, what is the point of this thread/discussion?

 

[jpx7]

"Rejecting religion is no sure path to virtue; it is more likely to lead to complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance."

I entirely agree with the first part of the claim; I am very skeptical of the second part. I don't think ardent atheism is any "more likely to lead to complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance" than ardent theism: it's this utter faith in absolutes, whichever way it swings, that in my mind leads to "complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance."

 

[AerchAngel]

There is very little--perhaps nothing--I am certain about.

You see, a simple yet powerful answer to a very difficult question.

Who can argue against that without it being exhaustive and counter productive?

 

[AerchAngel]

I entirely agree with the first part of the claim; I am very skeptical of the second part. I don't think ardent atheism is any "more likely to lead to complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance" than ardent theism: it's this utter faith in absolutes, whichever way it swings, that in my mind leads to "complacent self-regard, or ideological arrogance."

I kind of agree with that last line. It is absolutes and no one can say they are right or wrong and this will be debated until our deaths, but since noone I know of credence died and came back and told it all in the present day, we won't know and go by our innate instinct.

 

[AerchAngel]

That being the case, what is the point of this thread/discussion?

Because it can. Some good stuff in here. There is no finger pointing or Church of Scientology brainwashing going on.

 

[Dalyn]

Well, that didn't take too long.

Interesting article. And I think, a win for anti-fundamentalism.

"A polemical approach to religion has swung out of fashion. In fact, admitting that religion is complicated has become a mark of sophistication."

This kind of thing is just silly (and kind of disgusting). It's what I meant about the hipsters. I hope the article is right (and the hipsters start calling themselves agnostic again or Buddhist or whatever has some signs that make great shirts or tattoos).

 

[AerchAngel]

"A polemical approach to religion has swung out of fashion. In fact, admitting that religion is complicated has become a mark of sophistication."

This kind of thing is just silly (and kind of disgusting). It's what I meant about the hipsters. I hope the article is right (and the hipsters start calling themselves agnostic again or Buddhist or whatever has some signs that make great shirts or tattoos).

A pied piper approach to be heard, perhaps?

 

[Dalyn]

A pied piper approach to be heard, perhaps?

I don't know. It's like they showed up in the middle of a war with some nice shiny new uniforms and declared war, spent a weekend or three playing poker in the jungle, and then declared the war so yesterday and ran back home.

 

[Dalyn]

I also think it's funny how the article points out that certain social changes makes some of the things "new atheists" talked about no longer valid. That means they were heard and changes were made. How is THAT a bad thing (for so-called new atheists)?

 

[AerchAngel]

I don't know. It's like they showed up in the middle of a war with some nice shiny new uniforms and declared war, spent a weekend or three playing poker in the jungle, and then declared the war so yesterday and ran back home.

We have a rapidly changing and challenging world so they must come up with a new way to spread the news. I guess this is what they came up with.

It really wasn't needed unless they are scared of something...maybe control? It is not like you all need it, all atheists aren't the same.

 

[Dalyn]

We have a rapidly changing and challenging world so they must come up with a new way to spread the news. I guess this is what they came up with.

It really wasn't needed unless they are scared of something...maybe control? It is not like you all need it, all atheists aren't the same.

Dude. Religion (around the world) IS scary.

 

[AerchAngel]

Dude. Religion (around the world) IS scary.

Thanks for ruining my next post. It was centered on this.

 

[Dalyn]

Thanks for ruining my next post. It was centered on this.

Go ahead. Don't let me stop you. I'm sure it'll be worth reading.

 

[AerchAngel]

Go ahead. Don't let me stop you. I'm sure it'll be worth reading.

The world is changing and certain religions are losing their members, the Atheists are gaining members, Islam is getting scarier, the Christians are becoming more protective of their laws and eventually something is going to clash and we are seeing the results. Reading the article and Dalyns posts, I am seeing something here akin to funneling all Atheists into one group to have the same mind concept which I don't think Dalyn agrees with. This will take away individualism that Atheists enjoys.

If I am mistaken I am sorry, but I agree that religion is becoming more scary and to think the ones on this board think the religious right is scary even though they are protecting life (abortion) or standing up to a principality (religious marriage and rights) but not out there causing war because someone thinks differently. Eventually those who want everyone to accept and submit will win, but what will they fight next, to abolish religion all-together, make it a crime to go against your government?

Turbulent times are here to stay and I do not know where this will go, but it will be beyond my lifetime to see the end game.

 

[weso1]

"A polemical approach to religion has swung out of fashion. In fact, admitting that religion is complicated has become a mark of sophistication."

This kind of thing is just silly (and kind of disgusting). It's what I meant about the hipsters. I hope the article is right (and the hipsters start calling themselves agnostic again or Buddhist or whatever has some signs that make great shirts or tattoos).

Atheist denominations are beginning to appear.

 

[zitothebrave]

Balderdash.

WEll it would depend on what one would define a religion as.

Typically religion is defined as belief in a god or gods. But some define it as a group with the same/similar idea.

 

[Dalyn]

Atheist denominations are beginning to appear.

I am sure the media will try that approach now and someone will try to make money off it. Good luck to them.

 

[weso1]

I am sure the media will try that approach now and someone will try to make money off it. Good luck to them.

It's unavoidable as atheism continues to grow, imo. There will be many different denominations. You will be considered a fundamentalist although you will hate the term.

In the year 3000!