Feedback and Notes

 No Gods or Scumps Allowed

Latest Activity

Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"I can see Trump and his toadies in the GOP and the press using the commie reds under the beds'…"
6 hours ago
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"I concur with Stephen = Bernie and Warren would be ideal.  Bernie would not be my ideal but we…"
7 hours ago
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"From a  outsider it would seem that a joint ticket of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren…"
7 hours ago
Neal commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"I see Doone has been on a roll. =) Stephen: I am not a fan of Bernie, and I think if he gets the…"
8 hours ago
Ethan HAckley posted a discussion

What is an atheists raw perspective on the Bible and God

Doing a research paper, need opinions, please be honest and as detailed as possibleSee More
9 hours ago
Mrs.B commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"No clue, but loved the sound."
yesterday
Stephen commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"I wonder if he composed the piece beforehand or just created as he went along? But your right it is…"
yesterday
Mrs.B commented on Julien's group The Music Box
"Love this...."
yesterday
Stephen commented on Hope's group Imagine No Organized Religion, Please! Looking better in 2020!
"Tennessee Lawmaker: No ‘Solid Evidence’ Earth Is 500 Million Years Old Stupid For…"
yesterday
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"Good news for Bernie supporters, but don't forget what the establishment and right-wing press…"
yesterday
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"(In my own opinion, for what it's worth, I would much prefer to give up Trident missiles and…"
Sunday
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"Sorry, it is obviously a penguin and not a pelican.  Oddly, i see pelicans all of the time but…"
Saturday
Mrs.B commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"Too cute to be related to scum......"
Saturday
Stephen commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
" Penguin "
Saturday
Clayton Rhofes commented on Kathleen Judy's blog post A Brief Introduction To Wikipedia And The Wikipedia Community
"I love how someone loves wikipedia. I like open-source software,which means people write software…"
Saturday
Doone commented on A Former Member's group The Burgeoning Family Tree of Monkey Men and Women
"Brain shape evolved gradually within the H. sapiens lineage, reaching present-day human variation…"
Saturday
Doone commented on Doone's group Humans of Earth and a Grotesque Idiot News
"Scump's relatives are much nicer than him.  Here is one feeding a fish to a Pelican"
Saturday
Doone commented on A Former Member's group Animal | Vegetable | Mineral | Fungus or Burgeoning Cockwombles
"A young orangutan feeding fish to a penguin. (Photo: rexfeatures)"
Saturday
Stephen commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
"Oh no just found out she's a Canadian Gal comedian."
Saturday
Stephen commented on Adriana's group Freethought and Funny Bones
"It says Betty Bowers is played by Deven Green. Does that mean that this Gal is a Guy?"
Saturday

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

I saw this on Slate 

the full link is here

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2014/07/atheists_the_origi...

Know Nothing

The true history of atheism.



Illustration by Eleanor Davis.

Illustration by Eleanor Davis


Nick Spencer begins his spirited history of atheism with a fairy tale. Once upon a time, people lived in ignorant superstition, offering sacrifices to monsters in the sky. Then some clever folks used special weapons called “science” and “reason” to show that the monsters had never really existed in the first place. Some of these clever folks were killed for daring to say this, but they persevered, and now only really stupid people believe in the monsters.

Spencer’s point, of course, is that this received wisdom is naive nonsense—it gets the history of science and the nature of religious belief wrong, setting up an opposition between reason and faith that the church fathers would have found rather puzzling. (Spencer focuses on Europe, whence modern atheism arose, and hence on Judeo-Christianity.) Few historians take this myth seriously, but it retains its hold on the vulgar atheist imagination. To believe it requires the misconception that religion exists primarily to provide explanations of natural phenomena. (“You seriously believe in God?” “Well, how do you explain thunder?”)

A formal definition of religion is notoriously difficult to formulate, but it must surely involve reference to a particular way of life, practices oriented toward a conception of how one should live. “You must change your life,” as the broken statue of the god Apollo seems to say in Rilke’s poem. Science does not—it isn’t designed to—recommend approaches to what Emerson calls “the conduct of life.” Nevertheless, Richard Dawkins claims that religion “is a scientific theory,” “a competing explanation for facts about the universe and life.” This is—if you’ll forgive my theological jargon—bullshit.

Atheists weren’t always as intellectually lazy as Dawkins and his ilk.


To be sure, several scriptures offer, for instance, their own accounts of creation. But Christians have recognized the allegorical nature of these accounts since the very beginnings of Christianity. Basil, John Chrysostom, Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine—they all assumed that God’s creation was eternal, not something that unfolded in six days or any other temporal frame. In the third century Origen of Alexandria wrote:

To what person of intelligence, I ask, will the account seem logically consistent that says there was a “first day” and a “second” and “third,” in which also “evening” and “morning” are named, without a sun, without a moon, and without stars, and even in the case of the first day without a heaven (Gen. 1:5-13)? …. Surely, I think no one doubts that these statements are made by Scripture in the form of a type by which they point toward certain mysteries.

Well, no one but Richard Dawkins. As Marilynne Robinson writes:

The notion that religion is intrinsically a crude explanatory strategy that should be dispelled and supplanted by science is based on a highly selective or tendentious reading of the literatures of religion. In some cases it is certainly fair to conclude that it is based on no reading of them at all.

Science and religion ask different questions about different things. Where religion addresses ontology, science is concerned with ontic description. Indeed, it is what Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart calls their “austere abdication of metaphysical pretensions” that enables the sciences to do their work. So when, for instance, evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne and pop-cosmologist Lawrence Krauss dismiss the (metaphysical) problem of how something could emerge from nothing by pointing to the Big Bang or quantum fluctuation, it is difficult to be kind: Quantum fluctuations, the uncertainty principle, the laws of quantum physics themselves—these are something. Nothing is not quantum anything. It is nothing. Nonbeing. This, not empty space, is what “nothing” signifies for Plato and Aquinas and Heidegger, no matter what Krauss believes. No particles, no fluctuation, no laws, no principles, no potentialities, no states, no space, no time. No thing at all.

Atheists: The Origin of the Species seems to have been born out of frustration with these and other confusions perpetuated by the so-called “New Atheists” and their allies, who can’t be bothered to familiarize themselves with the traditions they traduce. Several thoughtful writers have already laid bare the slapdash know-nothingism of today’s mod-ish atheism, but Spencer’s not beating a dead horse—he’s beating a live one, in the hope that Nietzsche might rush to embrace it. Several critics have noted that if evangelical atheists (as the philosopher John Gray calls them) are ignorant of religion, as they usually are, then they aren’t truly atheists. “The knowledge of contraries is one and the same,” as Aristotle said. If your idea of God is not one that most theistic traditions would recognize, you’re not talking about God (at most, the New Atheists’ arguments are relevant to the low-hanging god of fundamentalism and deism). But even more damning is that such atheists appear ignorant of atheism as well.

For atheists weren’t always as intellectually lazy as Dawkins and his ilk. (Nor, to be sure, are many atheists today—Coyne accused me of “atheist-bashing” the last time I wrote about religion for Slate, but I really only bashed evangelical atheists like him. My father and sister, most of my friends, and many of the writers I most admire are nonbelievers. They’re also unlikely to mistake the creation myth recounted above for anything more than the dreariest parascientific thinking.) What Spencer recounts is the true history of atheism, which

had only a limited amount to do with reason and even less with science. The creation myth in which a few brave souls forged weapons made of a previously unknown material, to which the religious were relentlessly opposed, is an invention of the later nineteenth century, albeit one with ongoing popular appeal. In reality … modern atheism was primarily a political and social cause, its development in Europe having rather more to do with the (ab)use of theologically legitimized political authority than it does with developments in science or philosophy.

Views: 182

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I think the author of this article must live in a theology department where he has no contact with many religious people. I know several people who believe in 6 day creation as told in the bible. To say only Dawkins believes it is to betray his ignorance.

David Hard talks of a god that am certain most christians will not be able to recognize.

Deism developed as aresult of abuse of political power. Atheism, if anyone is to look at the earliest tracks like those of Messlier had a lot to do with philosophy and reason than politics. This fellow is truly ignorant. Sadly he calls atheists ignorant.

RSS

© 2020   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service