View Full Version : Are you a New Atheist?
Here is a good way to find out what kind of atheist you are.
Score one point for every statement you agree with:
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
❄ The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't. "Science is the only way of knowing – everything else is just superstition" [Robert L. Park]
❄ Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason. "The real war is between rationalism and superstition. Science is but one form of rationalism, while religion is the most common form of superstition" [Jerry Coyne] "I am not attacking any particular version of God or gods. I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented." [Dawkins]
❄ In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm.
❄ Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature. [Sam Harris]
❄ Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
You can score a minimum of 0 [disagree with all] and a maximum of 6 [agree with all]. After getting the results, score yourself in poll.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2008/dec/29/religion-new-atheism-defined
spidergoat
08-13-09, 09:53 AM
5. Some of the your wording is debatable. With some slight alterations, I would say 6. I gave myself 1/2 for statements I only somewhat agree with.
Please elaborate and I will make the changes.
spidergoat
08-13-09, 10:02 AM
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
Yes.
❄ The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't. "Science is the only way of knowing – everything else is just superstition" [Robert L. Park]
The question is not quite that absolute, it depends on what God we are talking about and how certain we can be of it's existence. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the best science can do.
❄ Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason. "The real war is between rationalism and superstition. Science is but one form of rationalism, while religion is the most common form of superstition" [Jerry Coyne] "I am not attacking any particular version of God or gods. I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented." [Dawkins]
I agree with the Dawkins quote, but your words make it sound like a kind of faith. I don't know if people will be led into reason, there is no much irrationality and so little education, I have doubts about our future. The characterization of a struggle is pretty much right.
❄ In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm. (Looking for links, I just came across a lovely example of this in the endnotes to the Selfish Gene, where lawyers are dismissed as "solving man-made problems that should never have existed in the first place".)
I'm not so sure religion is doomed. But it should be.
❄ Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature. [Sam Harris]
I tend to agree, but this is not necessarily a tenet of new atheism. There is some variety of thought on the matter.
❄ Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
Again, I tend to agree, but I'm not sure it's absolute. Are you trying to make a religion out of this? I think that is your goal, to mischaracterize new atheism as a kind of faith.
Hmm the quotes are from the New Atheists, you're supposed to indicate how far you agree with them [see link for sources]
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
Yes.
❄ The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't. "Science is the only way of knowing – everything else is just superstition" [Robert L. Park]
Yes.
❄ Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason. "The real war is between rationalism and superstition. Science is but one form of rationalism, while religion is the most common form of superstition" [Jerry Coyne] "I am not attacking any particular version of God or gods. I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented." [Dawkins]
I don't agree a 100%. Still, I'll give this a 'yes'.
❄ In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm. (Looking for links, I just came across a lovely example of this in the endnotes to the Selfish Gene, where lawyers are dismissed as "solving man-made problems that should never have existed in the first place".)
Too strong and arrogant, no.
❄ Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature. [Sam Harris]
No.
❄ Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
No.
So that's three out of six.
spidergoat
08-13-09, 11:09 AM
Hmm the quotes are from the New Atheists, you're supposed to indicate how far you agree with them [see link for sources]
I'm a New Atheist too, but we don't always agree with each other 100%.
Cellar_Door
08-13-09, 03:08 PM
I agree that it was difficult to give a Yes/No answer to most of these statements, so I tried to give a bit more detail in my response.
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
I completely agree.
❄ The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't. "Science is the only way of knowing – everything else is just superstition" [Robert L. Park]
Not exactly. Yes, I believe that scientific research, evidence and principles are the pretty much the only way we can claim to 'know' anything about the world around us. The cure for religion (if there is one) must be education. Without knowledge, what can we base any belief on?
❄ Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason. "The real war is between rationalism and superstition. Science is but one form of rationalism, while religion is the most common form of superstition" [Jerry Coyne] "I am not attacking any particular version of God or gods. I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented." [Dawkins]
In rationalism vs. superstition, how can anyone with half a brain pick the latter? Being rational doesn't mean you must be Draconian and elitist.
❄ In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm. (Looking for links, I just came across a lovely example of this in the endnotes to the Selfish Gene, where lawyers are dismissed as "solving man-made problems that should never have existed in the first place".)
I don't quite agree. I think it was Voltaire who said, "common sense is not so common. I can't see how spirituality, or even organised religion, will ever be wiped out. There will always be the stubborn, the ignorant and the stubbornly ignorant. It is human nature to give meaning to meaningless things, and most of all, to fear the finality of death. It's how we keep going and how we maintain our will to survive - we kid ourselves.
❄ Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature. [Sam Harris]
Well I do think that if you're going to follow The Holy Book, you should follow The Holy Book. Why would God issue a sacred set of guidelines only to let you pick and choose which bits you like and which bits you don't? If God really is omnipotent and omnipresent, his word must be the law.
Nevertheless, I don't think that more moderate forms of religions are some kind of subterfuge. I merely think that they are a reflection of the more moderate people who practise them. Even in 16th/17th Century Puritanical England, there were plenty of people who went along with religious ceremony to avoid conflict, but let it affect their lives, loves and attitudes very little.
❄ Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
An attempt at irony? I don't agree.
Stryder
08-13-09, 07:06 PM
SAM,
Atheism, is just like Vegetarianism.
It's not a belief, there is no faith, some people just happen to be that way. To read into it any further is ridiculous.
SAM,
Atheism, is just like Vegetarianism.
It's not a belief, there is no faith, some people just happen to be that way. To read into it any further is ridiculous.
Even vegetarians are separated into vegetarians, lacto-veg, lacto-ovo veg and vegans, there are also semi vegetarians.
Cris recently made an effort at defining atheism
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=95294
James R
08-13-09, 08:00 PM
SAM:
I could only score 1 on this list.
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
There are two uses of the word "faith". The first is a kind of faith in order and regularity, such as the faith that the sun will rise tomorrow. The second kind is belief in something for which there is no good evidence. Your statement ignores the first kind of faith, so I can't really agree with it. But allowing for the narrow definition of faith, perhaps I can allow one point here.
❄ The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't. "Science is the only way of knowing – everything else is just superstition" [Robert L. Park]
The first kind of faith I mentioned doesn't need a "cure", and I'm not sure that the other kind does either since some of that kind of faith is fairly harmless.
The existence of God is not a question that can be answered by science, in my opinion. Certain particular attributes or supposed features of God are subject to scientific questioning - for example, the supposed occurence of miracles or physical manifestations of gods.
So, I can't agree with this. Zero points.
❄ Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason.
I don't know what it would mean for science to be the "opposite" of religion. This seems like a nonsense statement, setting up a false dichotomy. Science does involve reason, but I can't agree with the statement as written. Zero points.
❄ In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm.
Religion is on the increase, if anything. Progress in science has never stopped people from having religious faith and it is unlikely to do so in future. Most people aren't trained in science or critical thinking and as a result believe all kinds of weird things.
On the other hand, some progress is evident. Most people, at least in western nations, these days no longer believe in witches or evil spirits, for example. We have largely stopped burning innocent people because we believe they are possessed by Satan; that's progress.
Anyway, since I can't see religion disappearing any time soon, I can't agree with this statement. Zero points.
❄ Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature. [Sam Harris]
Obviously, not all religion is the same. Moderate forms are better than fundamentalist extremist forms. Zero points.
❄ Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
I can't commit to saying that faith is "the most dangerous" force. Picking out one "most dangerous" thing facing humanity is exceedingly difficult and a dangerous thing to try to do. I mean, I think climate change is a fairly big threat to the future of humanity. I'm not sure how it ranks against the dangers of religious faith, but I suspect it may be a bigger problem. Zero points.
Crunchy Cat
08-13-09, 08:32 PM
Here is a good way to find out what kind of atheist you are.
Score one point for every statement you agree with:
...
...
...
There were parts in many of the statements that I could agree with but only one statement that I could agree with in its entirety. Maybe more granularity would produce better results.
noodler
08-13-09, 09:46 PM
My 10c.
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
- this statement ignores the kinds of faith we have in everyday events (like being able to use electricity, drive a car, fly in a plane). We have "unjustified belief" that we can do this safely (without injuring or killing ourselves), which is not true; electricity is very dangerous, flying is "impossible" instinctively. Everyone reacts in some way to the knowledge they are "thousands of feet in the air", they cope with their instincts by rationalizing their instinctive fear of (being in) danger.
❄ The cure for faith is science: The existence of God is a scientific question: either he exists or he doesn't. "Science is the only way of knowing – everything else is just superstition" [Robert L. Park]
Faith doesn't need curing, there is nothing wrong with faith. The problem is misconception, misunderstanding and "faith" in an ability to uncover what this is, from various angles (some misguided).
❄ Science is the opposite of religion, and will lead people into the clear sunlit uplands of reason. "The real war is between rationalism and superstition. Science is but one form of rationalism, while religion is the most common form of superstition" [Jerry Coyne] "I am not attacking any particular version of God or gods. I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented." [Dawkins]
Knowledge is science. If I know myself, do I have a personal science? How rational can it be?
Is "real science" only external, verifiable evidence that anyone can see? What If I also know that this knowledge is the same as many other people I know, have of themselves (they all report the same kinds of "experience", consistently)...?
❄ In this great struggle, religion is doomed. Enlightened common sense is gradually triumphing and at the end of the process, humanity will assume a new and better character, free from the shackles of religion. Without faith, we would be better as well as wiser. Conflict is primarily a result of misunderstanding, of which Faith is the paradigm.
Religion is the outward expression of inner knowledge; doctrine and dogma are the enemies of true religious struggle. One who is truly religious is not bound to any such written or spoken "knowledge" because they know no such thing can be written or spoken.
What's the most common form of expression, in worship? It's singing. Polynesians are all good at this, and singing is very religious (so is speech). They "treasure" songs and poems (history and tradition) - sound familiar?
❄ Religion exists. It is essentially something like American fundamentalist protestantism, or Islam. More moderate forms are false and treacherous: if anything even more dangerous, because they conceal the raging, homicidal lunacy that is religion's true nature. [Sam Harris]
Rubbish. Specious meandering. They're more a reaction to that homicidal lunacy, a kind of balance.
❄ Faith, as defined above, is the most dangerous and wicked force on earth today and the struggle against it and especially against Islam will define the future of humanity.
Faith in statements like this are also just as dangerous as the dangers they purport to uncover.
How's my score?
The only one I could agree with is ironically IMO the most ambiguous one:
❄ There is something called "Faith" which can be defined as unjustified belief held in the teeth of the evidence. Faith is primarily a matter of false propositional belief.
Firstly, I think it uses too narrow a definition of 'faith'. Still, I can understand it as religious faith. Secondly, what do you mean by evidence? Science evidence? So a person agreeing to that statement should believe in scientific realism? That renders the second statement unnecessary.
Anti-Flag
08-14-09, 10:04 AM
Given the often ambiguous and all round feckless wording, I scored 0.:shrug:
Haha, I think SAM might agree, but on reading all these posts of people (including me) complaining about ambiguous wordings and nonsensical statements and thus getting low scores, you'd tend to think that all the atheists are just petulant about not being able to score high on this atheism index, and are looking for frantic reasons for it. :p
Stryder
08-14-09, 01:44 PM
Even vegetarians are separated into vegetarians, lacto-veg, lacto-ovo veg and vegans, there are also semi vegetarians.
That my point though. Although there are differences on a person by person basis, it's not a "belief system". It's individuals being individual, it's just occasionally they might share something in common.
Its very much a belief system. Individuals will starve rather than break taboos.
SAM,
Atheism, is just like Vegetarianism.
It's not a belief, there is no faith, some people just happen to be that way. To read into it any further is ridiculous.
Vegetarianism is not the norm nowadays, and hasn't been for quite some time.
People do not "just happen" to be vegetarian.
People who are vegetarian usually are so due to a deliberate choice. So there are beliefs involved, there is the faith that a vegetarian diet is (for some reason or other) better than one containing meat.
visceral_instinct
08-14-09, 02:13 PM
That should have been worded better. "In the teeth of evidence"?? What's that supposed to mean?
That should have been worded better. "In the teeth of evidence"?? What's that supposed to mean?
Its a Dawkins quote, from the selfish gene
http://i26.tinypic.com/5lw477.jpg
noodler
08-14-09, 09:09 PM
What happens to Dawkin's meme, when a person has faith which isn't blind?
Someone who knows that faith is "redundant", as unnecessary (but worthwhile nonetheless) to the fact they are experiencing that which "leads to faith"?
How much faith is required in life, to have life? The question is redundant, unnecessary. Every living thing has faith in its life - conscious beings like us just abstract it into a "meme" whatever a meme is.
What's a meme? Is it a recognized scientific entity or a figment of our imagination? Does Dawkins rigorously define this entity (I haven't read his book from cover to cover).
Personally I have had some trouble with this faith, in particular in the person who is meant to represent the authority for that faith. That is, I lost faith in his authority and began to see him as another spiritualist, keen to exploit their followers and get rich (in fact, he is rich and lives very comfortably, is divorced after marrying an American and becoming a US citizen; lots of indicators there...).
I've revised this since realizing that the message isn't the man, the man is fallible and human, not some immortal being.
I have faith in the message and in the experience it led me to. As much faith as I have in a glass of water being able to satisfy a thirst. The authority "problem" is also redundant - if someone tells you something and you find out it's true, how much faith do you need to keep believing it is? If it's something as basic as drinking water, say?
iceaura
08-14-09, 09:25 PM
I scored 0.
Oh well. The miscellaneous drawer is always the most full.
quadraphonics
08-15-09, 02:12 AM
Individuals will starve rather than break taboos.
And other individuals will break taboos rather than starve. Still others will never face the choice.
So what?
"Individuals" will do anything and everything. Some would be embarassed to employ such blatant weasel wording.
spidergoat
08-15-09, 08:17 PM
Here are the principles of New Atheism as outlined by Victor Stenger:
* All faith is folly, including moderate faiths.
* Religion should not get any special treatment.
* The Bible offers no answers to suffering.
* Religion is not the source of morality.
* The Universe is matter and nothing more.
* Atheism is a positive philosophy.
* Atheism is growing, coming out of the closet.
* Godless societies are happier and healthier.
cluelusshusbund
08-15-09, 09:03 PM
Here are the principles of New Atheism as outlined by Victor Stenger:
* All faith is folly, including moderate faiths.
* Religion should not get any special treatment.
* Religion is not the source of morality.
I mos strongly agree wit the statments above.!!!
* The Universe is matter and nothing more.
I havent seen any conviencin evidence otherwize... however... even som atheists clame thers such a thang as "free-will" (magic?).!!!
* Atheism is a positive philosophy.
I perty much thank my atheism is.!!!
* Atheism is growing, coming out of the closet.
Not sure... i hope so :shrug:
* The Bible offers no answers to suffering.
Many relegious people clame it does.!!!
* Godless societies are happier and healthier.
I know plenty of religious people who seem happy an healthy... but i woudnt wish "religion" on anybody.!!!
iceaura
08-15-09, 11:38 PM
Here are the principles of New Atheism as outlined by Victor Stenger:
* All faith is folly, including moderate faiths.
* Religion should not get any special treatment.
* The Bible offers no answers to suffering.
* Religion is not the source of morality.
* The Universe is matter and nothing more.
* Atheism is a positive philosophy.
* Atheism is growing, coming out of the closet.
* Godless societies are happier and healthier. This old atheist picks a bone or two:
*All faith is not folly - faith that answers to reason is a strength.
*Religious principles and claims should be as carefully considered as other traditions of similar age and refinement. Those that answer to reason even more so. Equating religion with theism is confusion.
* The Bible is full of stories, not answers - but stories can answer suffering.
* The universe is a complex of patterns, which operate in logical hierarchies. "Matter" is just one of those patterns, a low to mid level one.
* "Atheism is a positive philosophy" is something Stuart Smalley would say to his mirror, if he decided to "be an atheist".
* Atheism is growing etc is not a principle.
* Than what?
hypewaders
08-16-09, 12:21 AM
Can't I get baptised or something? Can I put on a New Atheist getup? I feel so unremarkable and empty.
Here are the principles of New Atheism as outlined by Victor Stenger:
* All faith is folly, including moderate faiths.
* Religion should not get any special treatment.
* The Bible offers no answers to suffering.
* Religion is not the source of morality.
* The Universe is matter and nothing more.
* Atheism is a positive philosophy.
* Atheism is growing, coming out of the closet.
* Godless societies are happier and healthier.
Seems pretty representative. They missed the principle where all theists are delusional.
Can't I get baptised or something? Can I put on a New Atheist getup? I feel so unremarkable and empty.
The idea is to put on a robe that says "science" and walk around with the mantra "theists are delusional". Muttering it under your breath with interspersed chants of "science is the new saviour" is also acceptable.
hypewaders
08-16-09, 12:28 AM
OK, I'll give it a go.
hypewaders
08-16-09, 12:36 AM
Well, it's late- maybe tomorrow. My parents are in town, so I'll be getting up to go to (Baptist) church with them in the morning.
James R
08-16-09, 02:28 AM
Well, so far we have only one fully-fledged "new atheist" here, according to this survey. I guess we're a religious site after all.
Well, so far we have only one fully-fledged "new atheist" here, according to this survey. I guess we're a religious site after all.
Why? 'Old atheists' are not religious, right? :shrug:
Here are the principles of New Atheism as outlined by Victor Stenger:
* All faith is folly, including moderate faiths.
* Religion should not get any special treatment.
* The Bible offers no answers to suffering.
* Religion is not the source of morality.
* The Universe is matter and nothing more.
* Atheism is a positive philosophy.
* Atheism is growing, coming out of the closet.
* Godless societies are happier and healthier.
I would agree with all of those, except the one about atheism being a philosophy. How is simply not believing in something a philosophy ?
Stryder
08-16-09, 05:49 AM
Vegetarianism is not the norm nowadays, and hasn't been for quite some time.
People do not "just happen" to be vegetarian.
People who are vegetarian usually are so due to a deliberate choice. So there are beliefs involved, there is the faith that a vegetarian diet is (for some reason or other) better than one containing meat.
Then you know nothing of Vegetarianism. While some might base it on beliefs, others don't, others have no choice.
Well, so far we have only one fully-fledged "new atheist" here, according to this survey. I guess we're a religious site after all.
You just figured that out?
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.