How many "New Atheists" are there?

[cosmik debris]

It seems to me that the term "New Atheist" is a stereotype created by theists to group together people for the purpose of insulting them.

I've never heard anyone self-identify as a "New Atheist" and I was wondering if anyone here applies that term to themselves.

What does it mean to you?

[Taverner]

1. I'm just the plain old Secular Humanist Atheist

Didn't know there was anything new about that, since it was pretty much started by Epicurus

[cosmik debris]

3. As far as I can tell

It only applies to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens.

On the other hand.... http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/New_atheism

[dbonds]

2. It's neo-atheist, thank you.

Just kidding, not an atheist, but not a christian either except for shades of Gnostic.

[frebrd]

4. Lifelong atheist here, but "new atheist" sounds to me......

like a "spiritual" dilettante who's found something new to play with.

:)

[cosmik debris]

5. Actually Dawkins wrote a book with that term in the title

But I didn't think he originated it.

Maybe I'm wrong.

[Warpy]

6. I do know a few newly minted atheists

and they mostly share the anger and zeal of all ex-anythings, think ex smoker for example. Most will get over it soon enough and rejoin the human race, although their former churches can kiss the tithes goodbye.

I don't know any capital "N" New Atheists, though. All the atheists I know in my daily life came to the conclusion nobody was at the other end of the prayer phone a very long time ago and scoff at the idea that there is anything new about disbelief. The only novelty is being able to voice it safely among like minded people, to be honest about it at last.

I suppose that's what has believer panties in such a wad. I think enough of them secretly doubt what they publicly profess that they feel horribly threatened by people who don't believe it at all.

[frebrd]

7. "they feel horribly threatened by people who don't believe it at all."

BINGO!

:applause:

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Like musketeers, it seems to have started at 3, and expanded to 4

As far as I can tell, Wired first bandied the term around, in October 2006, in this article: http://richarddawkins.net/article,228,Battle-of-the-New-Atheism,Gary-Wolf--Wiredcom

using it for Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett, who all published books on atheism that year. And then Hitchens published his in 2007, and got tacked on.

So, blame Wired for it, I say.

[cosmik debris]

11. Thanks for that

My omission of Dennet was not intentional, but I'm not a "New Atheist" so I'm not familiar with the membership rolls.

[MineralMan]

9. I'm a paleo-athiest, I guess...

I just don't believe in any deities or other such supernatural entities.

[ZombieHorde]

10. What is a "New Atheist"?

[cosmik debris]

12. Search Amazon.com, google or

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/New_atheism

[ZombieHorde]

13. Funny link. I have not written an anti-religious book, so no, I am not a new atheist.

I have not read any of those books either, maybe if I read them all, I can become a new atheist.

[elshiva]

14. I am "new" atheist only because I became an atheist as of

April 2008. So, I'm new to this, but I think "New Atheist" is another way to say "a bad atheist because he expresses his beliefs that god is a myth."

[trotsky]

15. Gold star for you! n/t

[elshiva]

16. Thanks, trotsky.

:fistbump:

[trotsky]

17. Hey, is that a "new atheist" fistbump?

You fundamentalist, you!

[elshiva]

18. Heehee.

:) No, it's just a fistbump. :fistbump:

[Marrah_G]

19. I've never heard of it before.

I've also never considered Atheists a "group" before coming to DU. It's never been a big deal or anything in my groups of associates. Some believe in a higher power, some don't, neither sides judges the other. We all get along. To be fair I should say that most of the folks I am friendly with outside of family are athiests, agnostics, buddhists, lapsed hindu's, or pagans.

[Meshuga]

20. Same in my circle

Being an atheist or a believer is not really a big deal. Some believe in whatever they believe and some don't believe. That's pretty much it. Perhaps it is because I have only lived in very liberal areas of the country. I don't know but being atheist here is not a big deal which makes the "New Atheist" label not really useful. Like someone sorted pointed out in this thread, a "new atheist" is useful to describe a person who only recently became an atheist. :-)

[Dorian Gray]

28. Same with me

I live in NYC, so most people I know are pretty open to anything. Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, atheist, New-Ager, Yoga/Ayurveda enthusiasts. Nobody really cares. I think I'd want to gouge my eyes out if I lived in a place where people did care.

[Jokerman]

21. I was a "new" atheist the day I was born.

But since that day was well over 40 years ago, I'm feeling more and more like an "old" atheist.

[Odin2005]

22. I could probably be called a "New Atheist," though I don't use the term myself.

I abandoned religion about 6 years ago at the age of 16.

I was influenced a lot by Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens.

[cosmik debris]

23. Is that your understanding of the term?

A person who is influenced by those authors?

[Odin2005]

24. Yes, AFAIK. n/t.

[dmallind]

25. I'm about 25 years new I guess.

I don't think it's a shadowy conspiracy by theists to make us look bad. I think it's just a media friendly term to describe a group of writers who have taken apologia for atheism from abstract and dry philosophical musings to more visceral and agressive styles which are likely to get more traction among the masses. I mean who is more appealing in style to a casual reader - Sam Harris or George Smith? Dawkins or Russell?

I think both have their place, but this kind of style is something we haven't seen in atheist circles since Ingersoll (making it then not at all new of course, more of a renewal of atheist polemicism). It's getting some attention from people who would pay no damn attention to another Kai Nielsen book, even though it may be superior in reasoning and more moderate in tone.

My own style, anonymous and limited though it is, is somewhere in between. I am still too taken with process to write like Harrism, and too intemperate and aggressive to write like Nielsen. Which is undoubtedly why both are far more successful.

[cosmik debris]

26. That makes sense too.

Although I've been labeled a "New Atheist" because I'm rather militant, I find I have a lot more in common with the old atheists who were more cynical.

Maybe I'm just a cranky old man who hates all things new.

Oh well.

[Evoman]

29. Maybe?

:rofl:

[sakabatou]

27. I'm an atheist... and a Jew

Oh well.

[Evoman]

30. It's a stupid term used by stupid people.

[trotsky]

31. Kinda like "fundamentalist atheist" in that regard, huh? n/t

[Evoman]

32. Fundie atheist has it's place. At least it's fun to use, and a convenient way of

making fun of people. It's also an effective way to mark morons and ignoramuses.

"New atheists" just sounds stupid. It's way more lame than fundie atheist, and not as chuckle-inducing as militant atheist.

[EvilAL]

33. I'm just tired of being labelled

for not believing in bullshit.
New Athiest. fuck that. I could have been a priest until yesterday and would reject that term.

[PassingFair]

34. A "new atheist" is an atheist who admits to being an atheist...in public.

"Old Atheists" kept their mouths shut.