Protestant Countries & Atheism

[Rival]

I received a new book yesterday and here is a quote that I thought I'd share as it seems worth discussing,

'Parenthetically, it is worth noting that several of the most influential and outspoken representatives of New Atheism are "Anglo-Saxon males of Protestant upbringing from remarkably similar backgrounds of privilege and power."'

Now I'm not one for blaming men for this or that; hopefully by now folks know that's not my way. However, the quote does seem to have a ring of truth. So what is it with Protestant countries producing New Atheism, and with men particularly? Or do you disagree with this wholly?

 

[exchemist]

I received a new book yesterday and here is a quote that I though I'd share as it seems worth discussing,

'Parenthetically, it is worth noting that several of the most influential and outspoken representatives of New Atheism are "Anglo-Saxon males of Protestant upbringing from remarkably similar backgrounds of privilege and power."'

Now I'm not one for blaming men for this or that; hopefully by now folks know that's not my way. However, the quote does seem to have a ring of truth. So what is it with Protestant countries producing New Atheism, and with men particularly? Or do you disagree with this wholly?

It could be that evangelical Protestantism has been responsible for a lot of the most stupid, science-denying versions of Christianity and that it is this that has got up their noses.

 

[Rival]

It could be that evangelical Protestantism has been responsible for a lot of the most stupid, science-denying versions of Christianity and that it is this that has got up their noses.

But the RCC hardly has a clean slate and those countries don't seem to have produced this; nor did the Soviet clamp-down on religion produce such atheism either, quite the opposite.

 

[metis]

I'm not an atheist, but what's wrong with atheism?

 

[Altfish]

I received a new book yesterday and here is a quote that I though I'd share as it seems worth discussing,

'Parenthetically, it is worth noting that several of the most influential and outspoken representatives of New Atheism are "Anglo-Saxon males of Protestant upbringing from remarkably similar backgrounds of privilege and power."'

Now I'm not one for blaming men for this or that; hopefully by now folks know that's not my way. However, the quote does seem to have a ring of truth. So what is it with Protestant countries producing New Atheism, and with men particularly? Or do you disagree with this wholly?

Blaming them for what?

 

[JustGeorge]

I'm not an atheist, but what's wrong with atheism?

Absolutely nothing, unless it tries to proselytize.

But my problem lies with proselytizing, really, no matter where it comes from. Christianity, Islam, or Atheism(I only mention those three because those are the only three groups that have ever concerned themselves with what I believe. Other people may have different experiences.) I have no problem with any one group of belief(or lack thereof).

 

[exchemist]

But the RCC hardly has a clean slate and those countries don't seem to have produced this; nor did the Soviet clamp-down on religion produce such atheism either, quite the opposite.

I don't mean to suggest Catholicism is free from silliness - far from it - but it has not been in the business of denying science for at least a century or so. However when you listen to people like Dawkins, they very often seem to ridicule creationism, as if that is reflective of general Christian belief.

 

[Rival]

Blaming them for what?

Producing New Atheism; an ideology basically a religion in itself that seems to think religion is a world evil and is going out of its way to demonise and spread lies about religion and religious people. For enabling folks like Richard Dawkins, who is a biologist, to write a book about theology that somehow becomes a best seller. We don't accept it when theologians write on biology, so why it's alright the other way around I don't know.

 

[joe1776]

I received a new book yesterday and here is a quote that I though I'd share as it seems worth discussing,

'Parenthetically, it is worth noting that several of the most influential and outspoken representatives of New Atheism are "Anglo-Saxon males of Protestant upbringing from remarkably similar backgrounds of privilege and power."'

Now I'm not one for blaming men for this or that; hopefully by now folks know that's not my way. However, the quote does seem to have a ring of truth. So what is it with Protestant countries producing New Atheism, and with men particularly? Or do you disagree with this wholly?

Since we're talking about a small group of men: Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett and a few others, I don't think there's a sample size large enough to reach any conclusions at all without a long leap of faith.

 

[ChristineM]

I received a new book yesterday and here is a quote that I though I'd share as it seems worth discussing,

'Parenthetically, it is worth noting that several of the most influential and outspoken representatives of New Atheism are "Anglo-Saxon males of Protestant upbringing from remarkably similar backgrounds of privilege and power."'

Now I'm not one for blaming men for this or that; hopefully by now folks know that's not my way. However, the quote does seem to have a ring of truth. So what is it with Protestant countries producing New Atheism, and with men particularly? Or do you disagree with this wholly?

First, this may be just me but i know more female atheists than male. They, like me tend to be somewhat outspoken when challenged.

Second, the main point. I think some brands of protestant doctrine is rather lax at keeping the sheep corralled.

 

[Left Coast]

I received a new book yesterday and here is a quote that I though I'd share as it seems worth discussing,

'Parenthetically, it is worth noting that several of the most influential and outspoken representatives of New Atheism are "Anglo-Saxon males of Protestant upbringing from remarkably similar backgrounds of privilege and power."'

Now I'm not one for blaming men for this or that; hopefully by now folks know that's not my way. However, the quote does seem to have a ring of truth. So what is it with Protestant countries producing New Atheism, and with men particularly? Or do you disagree with this wholly?

I'm not sure what "New Atheism" even is. It's a term I hear thrown around all the time, but what makes someone a "new" atheist vs. just an atheist?

 

[Rival]

I'm not sure what "New Atheism" even is. It's a term I hear thrown around all the time, but what makes someone a "new" atheist vs. just an atheist?

It's the kind of position taken by Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris; that not only depends upon a disbelief in deity, but on the idea that religion is a malignant force and should be actively opposed, denied, ridiculed and shunned. It promotes, essentially, humanism and rationalism and generally what I'd call scientism.

New Atheism - Wikipedia

New Atheism was coined by the journalist Gary Wolf in 2006 to describe the positions promoted by some atheists of the twenty-first century.[1][2] This modern-day atheism is advanced by a group of thinkers and writers who advocate the view that superstition, religion and irrationalism should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever their influence arises in government, education, and politics.[3][4]

New Atheism lends itself to, and often overlaps with, secular humanism and antitheism—most particularly, in its criticism of what many New Atheists regard as the indoctrination of children and the perpetuation of ideologies founded on belief in the supernatural. Some critics of the movement characterize it as "militant atheism" or "fundamentalist atheism".[a][5][6][7][8]

 

[exchemist]

I'm not sure what "New Atheism" even is. It's a term I hear thrown around all the time, but what makes someone a "new" atheist vs. just an atheist?

It's an evangelical atheist movement whose principal proponents are Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and a handful of others. More details here: New Atheism - Wikipedia

 

[metis]

Absolutely nothing, unless it tries to proselytize.

But my problem lies with proselytizing, really, no matter where it comes from. Christianity, Islam, or Atheism(I only mention those three because those are the only three groups that have ever concerned themselves with what I believe. Other people may have different experiences.) I have no problem with any one group of belief(or lack thereof).

I feel the same way, although there's a rather bit of a fine line between posting an opinion and proselytizing.

 

[exchemist]

It's the kind of position taken by Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris; that not only depeneds upon a disbelief in deity, but on the idea that religion is a malignant force and should be actively opposed, denied, ridiculed and shunned. It promotes, essentially, humanism and rationalism and generally what I'd call scientism.

New Atheism - Wikipedia

New Atheism was coined by the journalist Gary Wolf in 2006 to describe the positions promoted by some atheists of the twenty-first century.[1][2] This modern-day atheism is advanced by a group of thinkers and writers who advocate the view that superstition, religion and irrationalism should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever their influence arises in government, education, and politics.[3][4]

New Atheism lends itself to, and often overlaps with, secular humanism and antitheism—most particularly, in its criticism of what many New Atheists regard as the indoctrination of children and the perpetuation of ideologies founded on belief in the supernatural. Some critics of the movement characterize it as "militant atheism" or "fundamentalist atheism".[a][5][6][7][8]

SNAP!

 

[ChristineM]

Producing New Atheism; an ideology basically a religion in itself that seems to think religion is a world evil and is going out of its way to demonise and spread lies about religion and religious people. For enabling folks like Richard Dawkins, who is a biologist, to write a book about theology that somehow becomes a best seller. We don't accept it when theologians write on biology, so why it's alright the other way around I don't know.

Science requires qualifications, religion and its effects require experience.

And yes there are a lot of anti science book's written by people who haven't got a clue.

 

[Quintessence]

Personally, I doubt this reflects anything beyond the typical white male power and privilege that still pervades in Western culture. If these books had been written by women from humble backgrounds, do you think they would have been anywhere near as widely read and influential? I don't.

 

[exchemist]

Personally, I doubt this reflects anything beyond the typical white male power and privilege that still pervades in Western culture. If these books had been written by women from humble backgrounds, do you think they would have been anywhere near as widely read and influential? I don't.

I think they might - like the Female Eunuch. It would be easy to package evangelical atheism as a redressing of the balance of power in society away from the hegemony of the clerical patriarchy [drone, snore].................ah, I see what you mean.

 

[Left Coast]

It's the kind of position taken by Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris; that not only depeneds upon a disbelief in deity, but on the idea that religion is a malignant force and should be actively opposed, denied, ridiculed and shunned. It promotes, essentially, humanism and rationalism and generally what I'd call scientism.

New Atheism - Wikipedia

New Atheism was coined by the journalist Gary Wolf in 2006 to describe the positions promoted by some atheists of the twenty-first century.[1][2] This modern-day atheism is advanced by a group of thinkers and writers who advocate the view that superstition, religion and irrationalism should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever their influence arises in government, education, and politics.[3][4]

New Atheism lends itself to, and often overlaps with, secular humanism and antitheism—most particularly, in its criticism of what many New Atheists regard as the indoctrination of children and the perpetuation of ideologies founded on belief in the supernatural. Some critics of the movement characterize it as "militant atheism" or "fundamentalist atheism".[a][5][6][7][8]

It seems to me this is not at all "New" or a product of the 21st century. Folks like David Hume, Friedrich Neitzche, and Bertrand Russell were at least as critical of religion as any of the "Horsemen." Calling the recent iterations of this thinking "New" seems to be a way of caricaturing it or making it seem less intellectually serious than the skeptics who came before it.

 

[Altfish]

Producing New Atheism; an ideology basically a religion in itself that seems to think religion is a world evil and is going out of its way to demonise and spread lies about religion and religious people. For enabling folks like Richard Dawkins, who is a biologist, to write a book about theology that somehow becomes a best seller. We don't accept it when theologians write on biology, so why it's alright the other way around I don't know.

Unbelievable!
'New Atheists' use words, criticism, debate and discuss and you say it is an ideology.
Yes, Richard Dawkins is a biologist, he wrote about evolution and in particular genes, he is famous for inventing the term 'meme'.
He got criticised by evangelicals and the like so he wrote The God Delusion - it was something like his eight book.
His understanding of science and evolution lead him to question his religious beliefs. He argued that anyone with a scientific background should not also be religious.

He obviously scares you, you criticise him without any logical reason.