Comments on: Theodore Dalrymple: What the New Atheists Don’t See http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/ Sat, 07 Jan 2012 13:12:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Bruce http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50736 Bruce Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:08:30 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50736 Apologies for typos and singular/plural confusion. Apologies for typos and singular/plural confusion.

]]> By: Bruce http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50734 Bruce Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:07:03 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50734 Andrew, <i>Atheism, being the belief that there is no God, is just as much a religion as any other.</i> Strawman. Atheism in its most common form is "no belief in God", not a "belief in no God". There is an important epistemological differences that differentiate the two (weak from strong atheism - the latter a lot rarer) that has been popularly recognised by atheists for rather a long time now. It is a far better thing to do to represent the epistemology and views of a group, rather than to make them up in lieu of investigation. I suggest in future that when disclosing the views and thinking of atheists, you check what they actually think first. It saves a lot of embarrassment. But back on the subject; "Having no belief in God is just as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby." (I paraphrase) is the phrase that's done the rounds of atheist forums and newsgroups for the better part of two decades. As for the hard atheists ("belief in no God"), I guess you could call them religious after a fashion. You won't get much disagreement from me on that. But again, they are a minority of atheists and attributing their views to the majority of atheists is like attributing Young Earth Creationism as a view to the majority of Australian Christians who don't buy into it. "Given that vastly more people have died in the name of atheism over the last century..." You can demonstrate a theory of atheism that mandates killing anyone? Given your less than accurate representation of something as basic as what atheism actually is, I'm sorry but I rather doubt it. Don't take it personally, but having seen "killed in the name of atheism" pop up as a meme over and over again, each and every time during the past couple of decades without any evidence of a causal link between the two*, I'm skeptical of your claim being any different. Bruce * And inductive fallacies such as correlation=causation, or guilt by association don't count as evidence. Andrew,

Atheism, being the belief that there is no God, is just as much a religion as any other.

Strawman. Atheism in its most common form is “no belief in God”, not a “belief in no God”. There is an important epistemological differences that differentiate the two (weak from strong atheism – the latter a lot rarer) that has been popularly recognised by atheists for rather a long time now.

It is a far better thing to do to represent the epistemology and views of a group, rather than to make them up in lieu of investigation. I suggest in future that when disclosing the views and thinking of atheists, you check what they actually think first. It saves a lot of embarrassment.

But back on the subject;

“Having no belief in God is just as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.” (I paraphrase) is the phrase that’s done the rounds of atheist forums and newsgroups for the better part of two decades.

As for the hard atheists (“belief in no God”), I guess you could call them religious after a fashion. You won’t get much disagreement from me on that. But again, they are a minority of atheists and attributing their views to the majority of atheists is like attributing Young Earth Creationism as a view to the majority of Australian Christians who don’t buy into it.

“Given that vastly more people have died in the name of atheism over the last century…”

You can demonstrate a theory of atheism that mandates killing anyone? Given your less than accurate representation of something as basic as what atheism actually is, I’m sorry but I rather doubt it.

Don’t take it personally, but having seen “killed in the name of atheism” pop up as a meme over and over again, each and every time during the past couple of decades without any evidence of a causal link between the two*, I’m skeptical of your claim being any different.

Bruce

* And inductive fallacies such as correlation=causation, or guilt by association don’t count as evidence.

]]> By: Bruce http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50715 Bruce Wed, 07 Nov 2007 07:51:04 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50715 I've found this article by Dalrymple to be flat out dishonest and I believe that Muslims (as well as anyone else) navigating the modern world would be mislead by it. I hope I'm not being too presumptuous, but I've posted <a href="http://thinkerspodium.wordpress.com/2007/11/07/theodore-dalrymple-and-austrolabe-what-dalrymple-is-helping-to-prevent-them-from-seeing/">a response about it here</a> (which really would have been too long for a comments thread). Thanks, Bruce I’ve found this article by Dalrymple to be flat out dishonest and I believe that Muslims (as well as anyone else) navigating the modern world would be mislead by it.

I hope I’m not being too presumptuous, but I’ve posted a response about it here (which really would have been too long for a comments thread).

Thanks,

Bruce

]]> By: Cinna http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50419 Cinna Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:11:04 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50419 Atheism is the lack of belief there is a god, actually. Even if your definition was accepted, which people have "died in the name of atheism"? What are the rites and rituals of the Church of God Nonexistent? As the body count is a consequence of what religions teach it's a pretty good way to judge them. Atheism is the lack of belief there is a god, actually. Even if your definition was accepted, which people have “died in the name of atheism”? What are the rites and rituals of the Church of God Nonexistent? As the body count is a consequence of what religions teach it’s a pretty good way to judge them.

]]> By: Andrew Reynolds http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50374 Andrew Reynolds Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:43:18 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50374 Cinna, Atheism, being the belief that there is no God, is just as much a religion as any other. To be certain it is correct you would need positive proof of the negative - that there definitely is no God. Given that vastly more people have died in the name of atheism over the last century I would say its track record is just as bad, if not worse, than other religions. It is in what religions teach, rather than the body count, that they should be understood and judged. Cinna,
Atheism, being the belief that there is no God, is just as much a religion as any other. To be certain it is correct you would need positive proof of the negative – that there definitely is no God. Given that vastly more people have died in the name of atheism over the last century I would say its track record is just as bad, if not worse, than other religions.
It is in what religions teach, rather than the body count, that they should be understood and judged.

]]> By: Cinna http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50324 Cinna Sun, 04 Nov 2007 17:15:15 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50324 As those with religious belief justify their behaviour with their religious belief it's very reasonable grounds to criticise it. What are the differences between superstition, dogma and religion? As those with religious belief justify their behaviour with their religious belief it’s very reasonable grounds to criticise it.
What are the differences between superstition, dogma and religion?

]]> By: Touchstone http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50301 Touchstone Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:05:20 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50301 Atheist arguments would be more plausible if they concentrated on criticising the incoherence of 'holy texts' and the superstition and dogma which plagues religion, rather than criticising the behaviour of those with religious belief. Atheist arguments would be more plausible if they concentrated on criticising the incoherence of ‘holy texts’ and the superstition and dogma which plagues religion, rather than criticising the behaviour of those with religious belief.

]]> By: Antish http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50088 Antish Sat, 03 Nov 2007 07:13:03 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50088 "The thinness of the new atheism is evident in its approach to our civilization, which until recently was religious to its core." Depends on what you mean by "our civilisation". Most of the Greeks who founded High European civilisation it weren't especially religious, nor the Romans. "Our civilisation" as Europeans know it today began in the Rennaissance with a decisive breaking-free from dogma. The much older (and arguably more sophisticated) "our civilisation" of China wasn't especially religious either. “The thinness of the new atheism is evident in its approach to our civilization, which until recently was religious to its core.”

Depends on what you mean by “our civilisation”. Most of the Greeks who founded High European civilisation it weren’t especially religious, nor the Romans. “Our civilisation” as Europeans know it today began in the Rennaissance with a decisive breaking-free from dogma. The much older (and arguably more sophisticated) “our civilisation” of China wasn’t especially religious either.

]]> By: null http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/comment-page-1/#comment-50026 null Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:53:00 +0000 http://austrolabe.com/2007/11/02/theodore-dalrymple-what-the-new-atheists-don%e2%80%99t-see/#comment-50026 Concise and beautiful. Concise and beautiful.

]]>