Rift forming in aethism

[sao123]

By Lisa Miller
Newsweek
June 18, 2007 issue - It may not be fair to call what's happening in the atheist community a backlash, since atheists have always been and continue to be one of the smallest, most derided groups in the country. In a recent NEWSWEEK Poll, only 3 percent of respondents called themselves atheists and only 30 percent said they'd ever vote for an atheist. No, what's happening in the "atheist, humanist, freethinkers" community is more like what happens to any ideological or political group as it matures: the hard-liners knock heads with the folks who want to just get along, and the cracks are beginning to show.


At the center of this controversy is the humanist chaplain of Harvard University, a 30-year-old "secular rabbi" named Greg Epstein. In March, in remarks to the Associated Press, Epstein called the popular writers Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins "atheist fundamentalists." He accused the best-selling authors?he now includes Christopher Hitchens among them?of being more interested in polemics, in tearing down and waging war on religion than in doing anything positive; his own responsibility, he says, is to speak out for the positive aspects of disbelief. "My problem with the atheists," he told NEWSWEEK, "is not that they're saying God doesn't exist. What I'm saying is we've got to build something." (Harris calls the term atheist fundamentalist "an empty play on words.")

In the blogosphere, where the atheist community is very active, some people aligned with Epstein, condemning the marquee-name atheists for their mercenary and destructive impulses. "The polemicists are interested in nothing more than selling," says Jeff Nall, a peace activist and grad student in Brevard County, Fla., who wrote a piece on this issue for The Humanist magazine. "The danger is in this ridiculous star status?they're seen as representative of the broader atheist community."

R. Joseph Hoffmann, senior vice president at the prestigious Center for Inquiry, lashed out at Epstein in a letter he posted online. He accused Epstein of mushy thinking ("Gen-X humanism for the passionately confused") and of using the Harvard imprimatur to stake out a divisive position. Epstein is the destructive force, Hoffmann says, not Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins. "His heresy," Hoffmann told NEWSWEEK, "is that he has an obligation to be embracing." In other words, Epstein isn't wrong, he's right: the name-brand atheists aren't friendly, at least not in print. But maybe being friendly isn't their job?it's his.

© 2007 Newsweek, Inc. | Subscribe to Newsweek

 

[jhayx7]

P&N is that way ------->

Also, I did not know aethism was a group to have a "rift" form...

 

[ballmode]

GET THE HELL OUT OF ATOT

 

[Looney]

Where's the 'rift' here? Some 'humanist chaplain' or 'secular rabbi' is upset that the big names aren't more PR friendly?

 

[Kadarin]

From TFA:

"My problem with the atheists," he told NEWSWEEK, "is not that they're saying God doesn't exist. What I'm saying is we've got to build something."

We've "got to build something"? Why? Think of building a huge edifice/church/monument and dedicating it to, well, nothing.

 

[FoBoT]

atheists are not all anti-religious
but all anti-religious people are atheists, as far as i know , but there could be an exception

like a spiritual anti-religionist , maybe

 

[Vic]

Agreed. As an agnostic humanist, I've been opposed to this hard-line anti-religion atheism for some time. The problem, of course, is the typical black-or-white, with-us-or-against-us extremist mentality that seems to be part of every internet discussion. It not only defeats all attempts at compromise, understanding, empathy, and increases strife, but it is blindly deluded and anti-intellectual as well.

 

[crt1530]

Science damn you!

 

[vi edit]

They aren't any different than Ann Coulter and the likes (of any political viewpoint) where their goal isn't to enlighten you on their viewpoints but to belittle and rip apart that of others. They move books and fill seats through hate and sensationalism.

It obviously works and lines their pockets well.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: crt1530
Science damn you!

What does science have to do with atheism?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment here, but while science may in many ways disprove the dogma of certain religions (for example, young earth creationism), it does not in any way prove atheism.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: crt1530
Science damn you!

What does science have to do with atheism?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment here, but while science may in many ways disprove the dogma of certain religions (for example, young earth creationism), it does not in any way prove atheism.

Go see the South Park Episodes "Go God Go" and "Go God Go XII"

 

[Descartes]

I think it's a shame that this shadow has been cast over Dawkins. His books have traditionally been insightful and enjoyable to read. His latest campaign will only blight these successes.

I'm actually interested to see how the renewed interest in atheism, good and bad, will evolve. I think the questions being put forth by the atheist foremen are ultimately more philisophical than anything else, but the vitriol in their words clouds these ideas. You can't deliver a message in an envelope of condemnation and condescension for its receiver.

Anyway, I'm curious to see how things will be in 10 years.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: jhayx7
Also, I did not know aethism was a group to have a "rift" form...

Kind of like when Anarchists get together as a group ...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Descartes
I think it's a shame that this shadow has been cast over Dawkins. His books have traditionally been insightful and enjoyable to read. His latest campaign will only blight these successes.

I'm actually interested to see how the renewed interest in atheism, good and bad, will evolve. I think the questions being put forth by the atheist foremen are ultimately more philisophical than anything else, but the vitriol in their words clouds these ideas. You can't deliver a message in an envelope of condemnation and condescension for its receiver.

Anyway, I'm curious to see how things will be in 10 years.

Exactly. Great post.

 

[lupi]

Rift? Do some not believe less than others?

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
They aren't any different than Ann Coulter and the likes (of any political viewpoint) where their goal isn't to enlighten you on their viewpoints but to belittle and rip apart that of others. They move books and fill seats through hate and sensationalism.

Nope, they're not. And all of them should burn, the filthy hatemongers.

 

[Rastus]

All groups eventually split into sects.

 

[crt1530]

Originally posted by: Rastus
All groups eventually split into sects.

Science damn you, Unified Atheist League!

Science damn you, United Atheist Alliance!

Hahahaha, you believe in a supernatural being.

 

[GrantMeThePower]

I don't believe it.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: GrantMeThePower
I don't believe it.

:laugh:

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
From TFA:

"My problem with the atheists," he told NEWSWEEK, "is not that they're saying God doesn't exist. What I'm saying is we've got to build something."

We've "got to build something"? Why? Think of building a huge edifice/church/monument and dedicating it to, well, nothing.

It's a metaphor. They have to build ties within the atheist community, and build bridges to those who believe in God. They are trying to build a unified front for an atheist movement. If they isloate themselves, they will be unable to spread their message.

That said, I like the idea of a huge atheist cathedral. Giant stained glass windows that depict nothing in particular (a single leaf floating in a puddle, a kat playing with some yarn, or that scene in Friends where Joey gets a turkey stuck on his head), pews with padded kneelers for when you start to nod off, a hymnal full of classic rock hits... This is a fantastic idea! Instead of communion, they could have the "cheese steak and beer" break. Someone needs to make this place.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
From TFA:

"My problem with the atheists," he told NEWSWEEK, "is not that they're saying God doesn't exist. What I'm saying is we've got to build something."

We've "got to build something"? Why? Think of building a huge edifice/church/monument and dedicating it to, well, nothing.

It's a metaphor. They have to build ties within the atheist community, and build bridges to those who believe in God. They are trying to build a unified front for an atheist movement. If they isloate themselves, they will be unable to spread their message.

That said, I like the idea of a huge atheist cathedral. Giant stained glass windows that depict nothing in particular (a single leaf floating in a puddle, a kat playing with some yarn, or that scene in Friends where Joey gets a turkey stuck on his head), pews with padded kneelers for when you start to nod off, a hymnal full of classic rock hits... This is a fantastic idea! Instead of communion, they could have the "cheese steak and beer" break. Someone needs to make this place.

No Pews, big comfy couches -- and no speakers, just whatevers on TV...actually screw the windows...and the building...ah hell, screw the whole thing

Let's just have a "go atheism!" cookout.

 

[ElFenix]

and so it begins....


i wonder when the otters will rise up?

 

[iamaelephant]

Wow. No one who has read Harris would call him a "fundamentalist" (and he is right to call that an empty play on words). Fundamentalist atheism is a stupid concept, because there is only one fundamental tenet of atheism - that there is insufficient evidence to prove the existence of a God. If you don't believe that, then you're not an atheist anyway. And no, I don't believe people who are indifferent or uninterested in spiritual matters should be classified as atheists just because they don't believe in some specific God. Being an atheist should require a conscious decision.

Anyhow, I recommend people actually read Harris' work before throwing him into the same basket as Dawkins. FWIW, I'm a fan of both men but I think Harris takes a more sensible approach to the issue.

 

[blackllotus]

You can't have a rift in atheism