Started by CrucifyCindy, October 12, 2015, 06:43:41 PM
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 09, 2015, 02:32:47 PMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2015, 01:22:34 PMI got the Dennett summary from a professional philosopher assessing his views. Missingnocchi brilliantly noticed that it is a part of his meta-theory of intention, not his theory ... thus his "not-this" ... that helps define "this". I find both relevant, in defining a thinker. That and his views may have changed over time. I will oblige at a later time, as far as gnosticism goes.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 09, 2015, 04:50:28 PMYou argue with Wiki? HeHEEEEEEEEEEE, isn't that just CUTE!!!Absolutely nowhere does that article support your false notion, which is like saying "God is dead" - that's equally impossible, for he never lived outside of peoples' heads.Whoever Tom Flynn is, his opinion is 100% correct as described by the article in question, and it means your reading comprehension is wishful, at best. Recently, there have been high-profile writers and speakers who have called themselves freethinkers, skeptics, agnostics, secularists, humanists, and atheists, but none of them have ever called themselves "New Atheists". That was a label slapped on by the media ignorati and obnoxious religious people in an attempt to taint the image of any modern-day atheist who talks about his atheism with cultism - now how's that for the death-cult followers to be pointing the stinky cultism finger at those who practice no such superstitious woo? Our ideas are so new and cultish that they are older than the oldest religion! There are increasing populations of people who declare themselves with some form of secularism, we are growing in numbers, but there never truly was a "New Atheist" movement, and nothing about atheism is anywhere close to dead.
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 09, 2015, 05:57:00 PMExcuse me? He clearly didn't understand that OP was referring to New Atheism, a specific movement within atheism, rather than atheism as a whole. I was only showing him the page so he could be better informed about what is actually being debated. Think before you post.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 09, 2015, 08:29:36 PMHole E Fukk - don't tell ME to think before I post, that's twice in a row that you show how much your reading comprehension (you and the OP) is shit! I pointed out that your fantasy of there being a cult movement called "New Atheism" is nothing more than a media fantasy - it never actually happened! Nobody who you would call a "New Atheist" ever accepted that epithet, so stop insulting us with it - NEW ASSHOLES!!!
Quote from: facebook164 on November 09, 2015, 12:55:26 PMI asked why Baruch thinks that Dennett is a gnosticist. Almost everything following that post is a derail.
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 09, 2015, 08:42:40 PMWeird, then that Dawkins did this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEClFXjx_fQ&ab_channel=TheAgendawithStevePaikinAnd all four of the so-called Horsemen did this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ-xK_PEDgc&ab_channel=GodlessworldWeird
Quote from: Baruch on November 10, 2015, 06:40:20 AMSeems to me that "old atheists" is more insulting than "new atheists" ... but on this forum, I wouldn't take any kind of "atheist" label to be insulting.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 10, 2015, 07:54:39 AM The absence of other groups of atheists who aren't "New", to which we would be compared makes my case that the idea put forth by "New Atheist" of atheists caught up in sectarian splintering or cultism is absurd. There are alliances to groups such as freethinkers, skeptics, humanists and such, but they aren't atheists unless they belong to our group too. As atheists (not as scientists, or whoever else we are), we are no different than Epicurus was.Thanks for your comment on what I should or should not find insulting. While I can't speak for other atheists, I'm aware of how powerful language is at the marginalizing of groups through false implications, and I don't see anything innocent in that insult. Since you insist on calling yourself a theist, you don't have the vote on that anyway.
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 10, 2015, 11:56:09 AMTo start with, there's Atheism+, which is highly critical of Dawkins and Hitch in particular.
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 10, 2015, 11:56:09 AMBut that assumes your premise that a movement isn't real unless there are other movements counter to it. A people moving as one are still moving, though that's clearly far from the case (as exemplified in this very debate).
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 10, 2015, 11:56:09 AMThe New Atheists are different from those who preceded them in their view that religion is to be fought head on rather than tolerated, and in their evangelical approach to atheism - they all had the clear goal of spreading their views rather than merely standing their ground. But I'm sure you have a long list of atheists who took those positions publicly before the New Atheists? After all, that's all it would take to show that the movement is nothing more than a book sale bonanza.
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 10, 2015, 11:56:09 AMOh, and by the way, Epicurus wasn't an athiest. The earliest appearance of that "why call him god?" quote was more than 500 years after he died, and it wasn't until a few decades after that that it was attributed to him. Epicurus merely taught that we aren't to fear gods, because as perfect beings they would have no need to meddle in the affairs of humans.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 10, 2015, 01:53:09 PM Citations needed, and they need to be from those who correctly self-identify as atheists. Maybe you missed that post where there are some who identify themselves as "atheist" on a poll, but also claim they are spiritual and believe in "God"? That doesn't fit the definition of atheist, which is simply not a theist! SHEEEEEEEEEEEESH!
QuoteOh, fukking Kreist on a motorized dildo! Atheists aren't a movement, and I know I have addressed that with you directly, and more than once already! We sure aren't, nor were we ever a unified movement. As atheists, we have no shared ideology, if any, but some of us are serious about making the definition of that word understood on account of people who stubbornly continue to feed such misconceptions.
QuoteAs atheists, we are no different than Epicurus was, and everything else that we are which differentiates us from each other has nothing to do with atheism.
QuoteOnce again, atheism is not a religion, and not an ideological group. There is only one type of atheist, it is anybody who happens to be a non-theist. If Mr. Hanky, the talking turd was crowned a god, and you didn't believe in him as a god, then this would make you an atheist as well on that god. At the moment, talking to my own shit is beginning to seem like a more sensible discussion for me to be having than this one, with you having made it so clear that you pay attention only to the shit rattling around in your own head.
QuoteYou still haven't produced an example of anyone self-identifying as a "New Atheist".
Quote from: CrucifyCindy on October 12, 2015, 06:43:41 PMThe New Atheist Movement is dead and it is not exactly the fault of those who really wanted to give atheism a voice. I do blame Dawkins, he has in the recent past made some very stupid comments about stuff that as nothing to do with atheismand he can be blamed for giving voice to misogynists in the movement. Do I blame Hitchens? Hell no! Even though Hitchen's politics were sliding into Neo-Con territory I do not blame him, in fact I miss him because he was the one voice that would have questioned Dawkins, Harris an d others. He was the ultimate contarian and I do apprieciate him. Do I blame Sam Harris? Hell yes. Sam Harris has an aggenda that has nothing to do with atheism (whether he is an atheist is doubtful, the dude beleives in Buddhist woo), he is an Islamphobe in the likes of Ann Coulter and you atheist accepted him and invited him into the dialogoe and people like him have poison it with hate.
QuoteThis is why the New Atheist movement has died.
QuoteIt lost any moral high ground and has become a movement of fear, hate and bigotry.
Quote from: Ace101 on November 18, 2015, 02:59:08 PMFrom the sound of your post it sounds like you're a follower of the far-left, social Marxist version of New AtheismIf you think vanilla New Atheism has died, take a look at the freakshow over at FreeThoughtBlogs - the site is so dead that its main page hasn't even been updated since 2014, and they're begging viewers to turn off their ad-blockers. Individual "Thunderf00t" videos get more views than the entire website.Nope it died because it relied on bigotry primarily against Christians rather than substance - 3% of the population isn't going to win fans from 73% of the population by repeating childish insults like "ha ha! you have an imaginary friend".No one could care less about the social Marxist New Atheists like PZ Meyers, he and the rest of his sideshow are the outcasts even among the New Atheists; Meyers was banned from atheist Ireland for example for being too hateful for their standards; e.x. calling Darwin, the founder of evolution, a "sexist asshat", making fun of Robin Williams' suicide, etc.Keep up with the times.The very thing it has criticized about religions. When Dawkins is making misogynistic statements and you accept them then you lost the moral high ground against religion,By "fear, hate, bigotrv (TM)" you mean "anti-Muslim" or "Richard Dawkins said something mean about a cyber-criminal named Rebecca Watson!" - if you didn't have a problem with the movement from the get-go you were never against "bigotry", since the entire movement was bigotry to begin with.If nothing else Dawkins, Harris, etc at least have grounds to claim consistency since they were bigoted against Christians and Muslims pretty equally - as opposed to reprobates like PZ Meyers and his FreeThoughtBlogs ilk who cried "Islamophobia" while joking about murdering Christians and killing Priests, or crying "sexism" while claiming that lesbians are better than straight women since they "don't have to sleep with their oppressors".