Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Thu Apr 11, 2013, 03:13 PM Apr 2013

Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists [View all]

Secular humanism is recovering from its Dawkinsite phase – and beginning a more interesting conversation

Theo Hobson
13 April 2013

The atheist spring that began just over a decade ago is over, thank God. Richard Dawkins is now seen by many, even many non-believers, as a joke figure, shaking his fist at sky fairies. He’s the Mary Whitehouse of our day.

So what was all that about, then? We can see it a bit more clearly now. It was an outpouring of frustration at the fact that religion is maddeningly complicated and stubbornly irritating, even in largely secular Britain. This frustration had been building for decades: the secular intellectual is likely to feel somewhat bothered by religion, even if it is culturally weak. Oh, she finds it charming and interesting to a large extent, and loves a cosy carol service, but religion really ought to know its place. Instead it dares to accuse the secular world of being somehow -deficient.

The events of 9/11 were the main trigger for the explosion of this latent irritation. There was a desire to see Islamic terrorism as the symbolic synecdoche of all of religion. On one level this makes some sense: does not all religion place faith above reason? Isn’t this intrinsically dangerous? Don’t all religions jeopardise secular freedom, whether through holy wars or faith schools? On another level it is absurd: is the local vicar, struggling to build community and help smelly drunks stay alive, really a force for evil — even if she has some illiberal opinions? When such questions arise, a big bright ‘Complicated’ sign ought to flash in one’s brain. Instead, in the wake of 9/11, many otherwise thoughtful people opted for simplicity over complexity. They managed to convince themselves that religion is basically bad, and that the brave intellectual should talk against it. (This preference for seeming tough and clear over admitting difficult complexity is really cowardice, and believers are prone to it too.)

The success of five or six atheist authors, on both sides of the Atlantic, seemed to herald a strong new movement. It seemed that non-believers were tired of all the nuance surrounding religion, hungry for a tidy narrative that put them neatly in the right.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8885481/after-the-new-atheism/

29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
ha jollyreaper2112 Apr 2013 #1
That's always the case, including posting on a website. rug Apr 2013 #2
yeh it doesn't work that way.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #3
US readers aren't likely to know Mary Whitehouse, suffice it to say she is what we would call dimbear Apr 2013 #4
Substutute religion for pornography and similarities emerge. rug Apr 2013 #8
Two things stuck out to me Goblinmonger Apr 2013 #5
Sheesh, you could close your eyes skepticscott Apr 2013 #7
You're read on DU that nonbelievers are less moral than believers? rug Apr 2013 #9
Yes and so have you. gcomeau Apr 2013 #12
I didn't read that as stating that nonbelievers are less moral. rug Apr 2013 #13
Just that they don't *have any basis* for morals? gcomeau Apr 2013 #14
Well, since he abandoned the thread, it's hard to know exactly what he was saying. rug Apr 2013 #15
i agree, to a point. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #18
I never heard of the Santa Fe Institute. rug Apr 2013 #19
i'd love to get a fellowship there.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #20
Yes I did. I'm looking through their videos. rug Apr 2013 #21
i suspected there might be something relevant from SFI.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #22
I've bookmarked the video, it's over an hour long. rug Apr 2013 #23
A more generally true truth is just as true no matter how anyone arrives at it, but the differences patrice Apr 2013 #28
Well, it is written from a British point of view muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #16
This is shocking to me. Religion is his ricebowl and somehow he's against those who would do away dimbear Apr 2013 #17
Another imbecile who doesn't even know the difference skepticscott Apr 2013 #6
Substitute antitheist then. rug Apr 2013 #10
That won't make the author skepticscott Apr 2013 #11
My brother lives in the deep South edhopper Apr 2013 #24
Dawkins scares believers... MellowDem Apr 2013 #25
Some think all belief should be doubtful, otherwise it isn't belief. nt patrice Apr 2013 #29
Bwah! What a load of broad-brushed, self-serving generalizations. djean111 Apr 2013 #26
The new Messiahs of atheism? Buzz Clik Apr 2013 #27
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Richard Dawkins has lost:...»Reply #0