The New Atheism: Preparing Its Own Hilarious Defeat
It discusses what has been called the New Atheism. Its inevitable failure is demonstrated.
3
Liked it
Liked it
Powered by 
It discusses what has been called the New Atheism. Its inevitable failure is demonstrated.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Post CommentVoj
On January 4, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Ahh! I love reading intelligent articles against atheism. I don’t see too many. Then again, I’m probably looking in the wrong places.
I agree and disagree at the same time. While popularization of NIHILISM is a bad thing, popularization of atheism is not necessarily. Nihilism means that people do not see a need for morals and, therefore, will do whatever they please. Atheism implies a disbelief in any higher power. That does not mean a lack of morals, it just means a lack of belief in a definitive set of morals.
I loved this article. Please don’t take my first statement in the wrong way. I’m open to everyone’s viewpoint, but I don’t see many people being as reasonable as you and your article.
Jas Writer
On January 5, 2009 at 10:31 pm
To: Voj
While I do thank you very kindly for your good words, however, I apologize if you misunderstood something I said by my not making my major point clear enough. The attempted popularization of atheism will not, on average, create armies of pleasant, urbane, sophisticated, etc. atheists. rather, it is critically contended that hardened nihilists will usually come into existence.
The common people, I do assert, are not that intellectually sophisticated enough to supposedly appreciate all the various and subtle nuances of academic or literary atheists. You, however, did hit my exact point more than you may know, by your correctly saying that atheism “means a lack of belief in a definitive set of morals.” Q.E.D.
teachersmith
On February 7, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Voltaire thought unbelievers had no rational reason not to kill him for the practical sake of robbing him.
>>it would appear that there are considerably more atheists now than in in voltaires time yet morals are not in crisis and people are robbed without being killed as indeed they were in voltaires time. atheism does not mean amoral or immoral.
The lack of religion, as empirically proven many times over, has been fully responsible for massive acts of evil
>>empirically proven by who and when?
Thus, these ultra-sophisticated morons, the New Atheists, are ignorantly unable to notice how willing they are to, in effect, create the conditions ripe for having their own precocious throats cut by enraged, nihilistic mobs engendered by rhetoric and printed diatribes against the having of religious belief(s).
>>i believe you will find that in the main the diatribes aimed at atheists are actually from those of faith. take a look on youtube for richard dawkins hatemail for a single example among many.
>>i have read christopher hitchens bestselling book and would have to disagree with you that he advocates hate as a good thing. i notice you do not reference this claim.
>>your assumption that atheism is nihilism is mistaken and your main point that atheism means a lack of belief in a definitive set of morals is unfounded and simply not borne out by the facts. the humanist manifesto is but one example of non-theistic morals.
>>your own aggression towards those you term ultrasophisticated morons, fools and morally insensate does seem to imply that you are an aggressive believer, seemingly a roman catholic one. the basic premise of your argument is based on a misunderstanding of atheism as nihilism and the article merely demonstrates your own ignorance disguised as educated rhetoric.
the New Atheism will, later, be surely replaced by a renewed Faith; it will, ultimately, be the Roman Catholic Faith.
>>you are of course free to make this claim though all the evidence shows christianity is dwindling and RC churches are closing down all the time.
this article was biased, uneducated and based on a basic misunderstanding. have you actually read any of the works by dawkins, hitchins, dennett, etc? I have and do not find them to be nihilists or immoral – quite the opposite in fact.
Jas Writer
On April 17, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Your great faith in atheism is so revealingly touching, and too ironic for mere words. So, of course, anyone who disagrees with you is always just wrong or, much worse, an uneducated dolt.
Arbiter dicta, however, is not true argument. The study of nominalism in thought leads, via truly committed atheism, ultimately to nihilism because there is no way out; have you not read Nietzsche?
Your bigotry notwithstanding, I remain yet thoroughly unimpressed by your oh-so-presumptive intellectualism. HA! HA!
PS Atheist regimes have murdered tens of thousands of times more people than all the religious regimes combined in all of recorded history — though I know you would deny this hard truth, among many.
jamie mullen
On June 20, 2009 at 5:27 am
First of all teachersmith is a catholic like you not an atheist. And secondly I know this has been thrown out befor but louisiana has one of the highest rates of church attendance in the USA it also has one of the highest murder rates in the country in contrast new hampshire has one of the lower church attendaces and the lowest murder rate. The theory that a lack of religion somehow leads to mayhem in the streets is completely without evidence or even good reasoning.
jamie mullen
On June 25, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Also as much as I love the works of nietzsche to claim that simply being atheist would lead to becoming anything like him is absurd apart from being one of the most brilliant philosophers ever he was also borderline insane so he had a lot of stuff going on other than his atheism(also he was not a nihlist.)