Reactions to the New Atheists

Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have done an excellent job of provoking other atheists, humanists, and religious liberals. According to this article, Greg Epstein, who holds the partially endowed post of humanist chaplain at Harvard University, has harshly criticized Dawkins and Harris for thwarting his conversion efforts, while E. O. Wilson puts distance between himself and the extremism of the New Atheists. Atheist Brian Flemming wanted Epstein to apologize for calling the New Atheists "atheist fundamentalists." Epstein then upset Flemming with the following reply:

I would absolutely be willing to consider apologizing for using harsh words in order to make my point (I think apologies are one of the most important things we can offer in life)– but perhaps when Sam and others are willing to consider apologizing for doing the exact same thing. Until then, I am not going to allow them to call people stupid and ludicrous and obscene but accept the double standard that I have to be nice and friendly to them and I can't use any words that might make them a little bit mad.

In the meantime, the religious progressives have also weighed in. Frederick Clarkson writes:

The issue of the invective hurled by certain atheists against religious believers is heating up. As I wrote last week, the invective of Sam Harris is great news for the religious right, whose manichean world view is framed by the forces of "secularism" vs. Christianity. Funny thing about that: it's almost a fun house mirror image of the thinking of what the Associated Press calls the "New Atheists."

Okay, but here's the thing that gets me. We have this large group of people who all claim to follow the lead of reason and evidence. If that is so, why is there so much division, fighting and emotion? And Sam Harris blames religion for dividing our world.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

This entry was posted on Friday, April 6th, 2007 at 6:32 pm and is filed under The New Atheists. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. The trackback link is: http://telicthoughts.com/reactions-to-the-new-atheists/trackback/

10 Responses to “Reactions to the New Atheists”

macht Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
Don't you see? They are arguing about religion. If there were no religion, they wouldn't be arguing and they'd all get along like happy sea otters.

Comment by macht — April 6, 2007 @ 6:41 pm

Bilbo Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Nice way to end your post, Brian Flemming. Maybe I should have done that with Dave Scot.

Comment by Bilbo — April 6, 2007 @ 6:56 pm

Krauze Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
This seems to be another trait of the New Atheists: A thin skin, such that whenever others refuse to tip-toe around them in fluffy slippers, they get all indignant.

Comment by Krauze — April 6, 2007 @ 6:58 pm

Bilbo Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
PZ has a topic on what ornery atheists are supposed to call themselves. I suggested "ornery atheists."

Comment by Bilbo — April 6, 2007 @ 7:01 pm

Bradford Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Atheist Fundamentalists is perfect.

Comment by Bradford — April 6, 2007 @ 7:11 pm

Krauze Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
PZ's complaints about the incorrect usage of "fundamentalist" in "fundamentalist atheists" is ironic, considering that the New Ateists have worked hard to empty the word "fundamentalist" of its original meaning, turning it into a term of derision. Guess they didn't expect it to come back and bite them.

Comment by Krauze — April 6, 2007 @ 7:12 pm

stunney Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
And Sam Harris blames religion for dividing our world

Religion is divisive. So is atheism.

Ditto politics: Right v Left

Economics: Rich v Poor

Music: Opera v Rap

Gender: Male v Female

Golf: Golfers v Golf-Haters

Morality: Good v Bad

Rationality: Rational v Irrational

Fashion: Chic v Frumpy

But if we examine all these divisive phenomena, we find that the worst mass killing relating to any of them that occurred in the latest period of a typical human lifespan, say 80 years, was perpetrated by militant Stalinist and Maoist atheists, with a total estimated toll of 60 million victims.

Comment by stunney — April 6, 2007 @ 7:27 pm

Raevmo Says:
April 6th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
But if we examine all these divisive phenomena, we find that the worst mass killing relating to any of them that occurred in the latest period of a typical human lifespan, say 80 years, was perpetrated by militant Stalinist and Maoist atheists, with a total estimated toll of 60 million victims.

ignoring the convenient 80-year cut-off, I'll raise the atheist 60 million with the christian 200 million of the Taiping Rebellion.

Comment by Raevmo — April 6, 2007 @ 8:49 pm

stunney Says:
April 7th, 2007 at 12:09 am
raevmo:

ignoring the convenient 80-year cut-off, I'll raise the atheist 60 million with the christian 200 million of the Taiping Rebellion

Not so…

The Taiping Rebellion (or Rebellion of Great Peace) was a large-scale revolt against the authority and forces of the Qing Government in China, conducted by an army and civil administration inspired by Hakka self-proclaimed mystics named Hong Xiuquan and Yang Xiuqing. Hong was an unorthodox Christian convert who declared himself the new Messiah and younger brother of Jesus Christ. Yang Xiuqing was a former salesman of firewood in Guangxi, who frequently claimed to be able to act as a mouthpiece of God to direct the people and gain himself a large amount of political power. Hong, Yang and their followers established the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom (officially Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace) and attained control of significant parts of southern China.

Most accurate sources put the total deaths during the 15 years of the rebellion at about 20 million civilians and army personnel, [1] although some claim the death toll was much higher (as many as 50 million according to at least one source). [2] Some historians estimate the combination of natural disasters together with the political insurrections may have cost as many as 200 million Chinese lives between 1850 and 1865. [3] That figure is generally thought to be an exaggeration, as it is approximately half the estimated population of China in 1851. [4]

Comment by stunney — April 7, 2007 @ 12:09 am

inunison Says:
April 7th, 2007 at 3:04 am
stunney,

Now we have obvious anti-Christ boxed together with Christians to show how evil our faith is.

Father Berg put it quite nicely:

If secularists want to have a meaningful voice in the public square "” and not a preposterous one "” then we invite them to be attentive students of history, and with intellectual honesty to recognise that Christianity in particular has a lengthy track record of contributing to the very goals that secularists profess to be seeking: beliefs grounded in reason, an ethics sustained by reasonable moral discourse, advances in human knowledge, and the general betterment of human life.

Complete article can be found here

Comment by inunison — April 7, 2007 @ 3:04 am

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Reactions to the New Atheists

10 Responses to “Reactions to the New Atheists”

Leave a Reply

Featured Books