How we shoud all present ourselves as atheists

[Solitary]

Share on Twitter™ Share on Facebookš email this storyà comment on this storyu 823
By Margery Eagan
On Spirituality columnist June 17, 2015





http://www.cruxnow.com/faith/2015/06/17/losing-our-religion/You



Go hear even a semi-famous Catholic speaker. More often than not the event is free, the auditorium is half full, and almost everybody’s old.
But last week in a Boston suburb, the Chevalier Theater, 2,036 seats, packed ’em in. Downtown Medford’s parking lots overflowed. Cops directed traffic. It cost $35 a ticket and I’d estimate the average age was 30.

The speakers? Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, two prominent proselytizers for the so-called “New Atheism.”

I guess you could call the evening evidence of what the Pew Research Center on Religion and Society reported last month in its latest faith survey. Christianity, including Catholicism, is tanking in America. The number of non-believers is rising. Nearly 1 in 5 adults identify with no religion at all. And the biggest non-believers are young men and women like the ones who cheered and laughed and had a great old time at the Chevalier hearing two gray-haired guys go on about the ridiculousness of believing something based on nothing.

Let me say right now: As a Catholic who ricochets wildly between blissful moments of faith and complete and utter doubt, I found the whole experience unnerving. I’d hoped both men would be humorless, strident, militant, even obnoxious. Then I could go home feeling confident in my faith. Instead they were funny, charming, and quite likable. I went home deflated. I looked up everyone who’s debated them or contradicted them and argued for the wondrous mysteries of the divine. Then I feel asleep in a funk.

Perhaps you’ve heard of the intellectuals nicknamed the “Four Horsemen of the Non-Apocalypse.” Dawkins and Dennett are two of them. The third was the late Christopher Hitchens, author of “God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, ” and essays proclaiming his non-conversion even as he lay dying of cancer. The fourth is Sam Harris, author of the best sellers “The End of Faith” and “Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion.”

[Hydra009]

Sol, the link you posted isn't working right.  Here's a working link for anyone interested.

I guess you could call the evening evidence of what the Pew Research Center on Religion and Society reported last month in its latest faith survey. Christianity, including Catholicism, is tanking in America. The number of non-believers is rising. Nearly 1 in 5 adults identify with no religion at all.

This is great news.  Though both Catholics and Christians in generals still boast huge numbers in the US, it's nice to see the Nones chip away at it.

And the biggest non-believers are young men and women like the ones who cheered and laughed and had a great old time at the Chevalier hearing two gray-haired guys go on about the ridiculousness of believing something based on nothing.

When she puts it like that, it sounds rather dull or rude.  But in actuality, they're very insightful and entertaining speakers.  And as much as they do cover religion, it's not all they talk about.  (Much like our own forum)  Both speakers are well versed in science in general and evolution in particular, and Dawkins is known to get quite passionate about the importance of science.  In a culture that regularly politicizes and attacks scientific theories that the faithful don't like and there's a very strong push-back against that, particularly from young people, I can certainly see high demand to hear what they have to say.

Let me say right now: As a Catholic who ricochets wildly between blissful moments of faith and complete and utter doubt, I found the whole experience unnerving. I’d hoped both men would be humorless, strident, militant, even obnoxious. Then I could go home feeling confident in my faith.

That's one hell of an admission.  "I'm religious, so I expected these atheists to behave badly."  That sounds just a tad prejudiced against atheists.  "If they behaved badly, I'd think I was on the right track with my religion"  How does one follow from the other?  If I saw a Muslim acting obnoxiously, I doubt I'd think to myself that this somehow reaffirms atheism.

Instead they were funny, charming, and quite likable. I went home deflated. I looked up everyone who’s debated them or contradicted them and argued for the wondrous mysteries of the divine. Then I feel asleep in a funk.

That must've been one hell of a session.  Depak Chopra.  William Lane Craig.  Wendy Wright.  Ted Haggard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLh5HbxDEhE

I honestly have a hard time believing that anyone, theist or atheist, watched that little exchange and thought that Dawkins was a smarmy, arrogant idiot peddling nonsense while Haggard was the voice of reason.

And Dennett and Dawkins’ Medford fans seemed positively gleeful about it all.

Maybe they’ll rethink when they’re older and facing their own mortality. Alas, Dennett is 73. Dawkins? He’s 74.

It really bugs me when theists try to threaten atheists with hell.  It's like a hippie threatening to punch me in my aura.  Or declaring that Santa won't give me any more presents.

Atheists don't believe in hell.  They're not worried about it.  You're the one who's worried about mortality and hell and all that stuff and simply projecting your fears onto atheists.

There was an hour-long, book-signing line after last week’s lecture. So I asked some of those waiting patiently about the New Atheism’s appeal. Some common answers: It’s much more rational than angels and God-made-man. Too much of organized religion is corrupted by money and power. And cradle Catholics said just what you’d expect: They are unable to remain in a Church that treats women and gays as less-thans and sex as evil. Pope Francis may be a nice guy â€" and on the right side of climate change â€" but it’s not enough.

Though I'm an ex-Methodist rather than an ex-Catholic, I'd like to add to the list that I'm very glad to get away from an organization that claims special knowledge (revelation) that it doesn't actually possess, milks the faithful for funds (ostensibly, for worthy causes), and fosters self-harming ideas like hell and sin which it then purports to solve (a modus operandi commonly observed in scams).

Atheism, in stark contrast, requires nothing and is far more congruent with reality.  Basically, it's like getting rid of a costly landline service that you don't actually need because you don't own a landline phone.  Pretty easy choice.  And to be perfectly honest, I tend to wonder about the intelligence of those who won't do the same.

Like I said, it was a tough night.

This just in:  Christian dismayed at rise of atheism.  Film at 11.

[Baruch]

The pro-con of the New Atheists are probably overblown ... it is necessary for marketing on both sides.  I don't care for Dawkins' politics, but his biology is OK, nor do I care for Dennett's metaphysics ... John Searle is far better.  Harris is the best of the bunch, because he acknowledges spiritualism.  Hitchens was funny to me, because I like a funny contrarian drunk.  A mixed bunch who mostly rehash old arguments in new clothes.  There really hasn't been anything new since Voltaire's "Philosophical Dictionary" or the contemporary dictionary of Samuel Johnson.

Here is the problem ... contemporary authors talking in deep terms of contemporary events ... become dated as fashion moves on.  But authors who address the deeper terms directly, without the spice of contemporary controversy ... can be dull ;-(

[the_antithesis]

Hello, I am the antithesis and I do not collect stamps.

[Solitary]

Sol, the link you posted isn't working right.  Here's a working link for anyone interested.
This is great news.  Though both Catholics and Christians in generals still boast huge numbers in the US, it's nice to see the Nones chip away at it.
When she puts it like that, it sounds rather dull or rude.  But in actuality, they're very insightful and entertaining speakers.  And as much as they do cover religion, it's not all they talk about.  (Much like our own forum)  Both speakers are well versed in science in general and evolution in particular, and Dawkins is known to get quite passionate about the importance of science.  In a culture that regularly politicizes and attacks scientific theories that the faithful don't like and there's a very strong push-back against that, particularly from young people, I can certainly see high demand to hear what they have to say.
That's one hell of an admission.  "I'm religious, so I expected these atheists to behave badly."  That sounds just a tad prejudiced against atheists.  "If they behaved badly, I'd think I was on the right track with my religion"  How does one follow from the other?  If I saw a Muslim acting obnoxiously, I doubt I'd think to myself that this somehow reaffirms atheism.
That must've been one hell of a session.  Depak Chopra.  William Lane Craig.  Wendy Wright.  Ted Haggard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLh5HbxDEhE

I honestly have a hard time believing that anyone, theist or atheist, watched that little exchange and thought that Dawkins was a smarmy, arrogant idiot peddling nonsense while Haggard was the voice of reason.
It really bugs me when theists try to threaten atheists with hell.  It's like a hippie threatening to punch me in my aura.  Or declaring that Santa won't give me any more presents.

Atheists don't believe in hell.  They're not worried about it.  You're the one who's worried about mortality and hell and all that stuff and simply projecting your fears onto atheists.
Though I'm an ex-Methodist rather than an ex-Catholic, I'd like to add to the list that I'm very glad to get away from an organization that claims special knowledge (revelation) that it doesn't actually possess, milks the faithful for funds (ostensibly, for worthy causes), and fosters self-harming ideas like hell and sin which it then purports to solve (a modus operandi commonly observed in scams).

Atheism, in stark contrast, requires nothing and is far more congruent with reality.  Basically, it's like getting rid of a costly landline service that you don't actually need because you don't own a landline phone.  Pretty easy choice.  And to be perfectly honest, I tend to wonder about the intelligence of those who won't do the same.
This just in:  Christian dismayed at rise of atheism.  Film at 11.

Thanks HYDRA! I'm having a bad week for some reason. I guess I'm getting too excited thinking about moving to southern California.   

[dylanb1121]

Lol, it's hilarious to me. Soon we will have flying cars and people still take fairy tales about people in the sky serious, oh Lord.

[Mike Cl]

Lol, it's hilarious to me. Soon we will have flying cars and people still take fairy tales about people in the sky serious, oh Lord.

Yeah--funny, isn't it?  Yeah it is.  But you will find that many, many rely only on faith and not on reason.  Can't reason with a faith holder.