I Don’t Believe in Atheists

Posted on May 6, 2008
Filed Under Religion |

There’s a very interesting podcast up at Point of Inquiry titled “I Don’t Believe in Atheists”. The interview was with Chris Hedges - a figure I’m just not familiar with. Hedges main point is that the New Atheists adopt a position very much like fundamentalism. I thought Hedges made quite a few great points - especially with regard to factual claims about religion being the problem. (Something that New Atheists often claim) Having said that I couldn’t help but think he had his own problems with hyperbole.

There are a few blogs discussing the interview, such as at Breaking Spells at Center for Inquiry and a few others. Most noted that Hedges creates a bit of a caricature of New Atheism and certainly took umbrage with claims about wanting to destroy Islam. I don’t know most of the players in the debate since I take only a causal interest. But I have a hard time seeing most New Atheists making the sorts of claims Hedges said they do. Some do, of course. But those are usually internet trolls making outrageous statements in the comments of blogs. Such figures are outliers and while annoying ought merely be ignored. (Although one wishes New Atheists would be so courteous as to do the same with theistic outliers)

The main problem I have with New Atheists was brought out in the interview. That the accomplishments of religion are often attributed to secularism with religion’s role downplayed; that the effects best laid at the feet of human nature are instead attributed to religion and its structure; and that complexity in history is laid out in a superficial manner.

While I’m not sure ‘fundamentalism’ in its technical sense can be applied to the New Atheists certainly many components can be. There is the dehumanizing of the Other. There is a definite utopian thrust to the debate. (i.e. if we could get rid of religion the world would be amazingly better - maybe not perfect but certainly a kind of utopia) There’s even a focus on ‘right belief.’ For New Atheists that includes disbelief in God and a near scientism kind of trust in science as the way of knowing.

Having said all that I fear that some of the hyperbole with respect to New Atheists is counterproductive. Even if they are structurally similar to fundamentalists - so what? Doesn’t that at best mean they are passionate about a particular ideology? How is that different from hundreds of other ideologies that gather support - especially in politics? The label of ‘fundamentalist’ ends up not quite doing the job some are trying to make it do. The hope is, I suspect, to tar the New Atheists with the label so that people look as much askew at New Atheists as they do fundamentalist Evangelicals. (Or even Mormons - even though I don’t think Mormons qualify as fundamentalists)

Comments

4 Responses to “I Don’t Believe in Atheists”
1 Michael Dorfman on May 7th, 2008 1:31 am

How can I tell if I am a “new” or “old” Atheist?

Also, how similar, really, is “New Atheism” (whatever that might be) to fundamentalism? Are you suggesting that it involves a dogmatic reliance on single text (or other fixed body of dogma)?

Maybe it’s my own bias, but I’d like to think that there is an epistemological difference in status between “I believe in Santa Claus” and “I don’t believe in Santa Claus”, and that this might be relevant to the issue at hand.

That’s the big reason I don’t think it is fundamentalism. I think that at best it works as an allegory. I think the main points of similarity is that one demonizes members of the other group; one projects a utopia if everyone just believed like you; and one tends to talk is absolutes.

But religious fundamentalists tend to take a narrow overly literalistic and inerrant view of some set of texts. Now I think some Marxists used to fit the fundamentalist mold in terms of how they took various Marxist texts. But I don’t think there are too many Marxists of that stripe left anymore. All the Marxists I know are pretty self-critical and take a skeptical view of Marx and later Marxist writers. So it’s a more critical approach to the texts. I suspect that there are a few environmentalists who might fit the fundamentalist mold more. But even there I’d be pretty cautious. And of course most environmentalists don’t have texts they adopt too strongly. Now I’ve met alternative medicine and health food folks who do fit the fundamentalist mold.

I like to think the New Atheists make up a small segment of all atheists just as American fundamentalists make up a small segment of Christianity.

The issue of belief isn’t really at issue as I see it. Rather it is how one views ones beliefs and those who don’t hold the beliefs. (For the record I can’t see you being one of the New Atheists)

3 Gerald Smith on May 7th, 2008 5:25 pm

At the recent Mormons and American Life seminar at IUPUI (Indianapolis), William Deverell (Prof of History, USC), spoke on Mormonism, California and the upcoming Civil War. He started with a rebuke to Western historians that tended to ignore religion as a component with the settling of the West. He stated, “western historians ignored Mormons in the gold fields, as if some Mormons accidentally overshot Utah and found themselves in California.” Sometimes it seems as if humanist scholars are so focused on creating a history that is not biased by religion that they totally exclude it.
Of course, often when they do include a bit on religion, it is usually the sensational and negative. Hence, we get many that tell how terrible Islam is, when it is only a segment of that society that is dangerous.
So, for me, much of the issue is just the point of ignoring religion. Yes, some new Atheists seek to destroy religion, or at least attack it. We don’t really see most Baptists actively attacking Mormons, either; but we definitely remember and dwell on the few that do make waves.

I think from what I can see everyone has their biases and the makeup of many departments in history and the humanities reflects those biases. Not everyone is so blinded by them of course. And a lot of it is simply not finding something interesting so you don’t focus in on it and are thus ignorant. I think it’s rarely any kind of malice.

I think that’s what’s different with this relatively small subset of atheists. They see religion - especially certain religions - as a threat and treat them with a kind of malice. Of course many religious people are just as bad if not worse. Of course we, as Mormons, know that with some of the fun fundamentalist Evangelicals who truly fear and hold malice towards Mormons. And frankly given the choice of those fundamentalists and the New Atheists I’d take the atheists every time.

Leave a Reply