The new Athiest Humanities downfall?

[Altfish]

Same as with religion. And in both instances, some views are extreme and occasionally dangerous. Most theists understand this about theism. But do most atheists understand this about atheism?

It appears not.

Can you give me an example of a dangerous atheist thought?

 

[Ella S.]

It's just another ideology competing for world domination. We already have quite a few of those and humanity is still around.

 

[PureX]

Can you give me an example of a dangerous atheist thought?

Just curios, what exactly do you see as dangerous about atheism, even if you take the most extreme atheism that you can think of? What do you think that it would bring with it in terms of harm or what else one could include in the word dangerous?

I see these knee-jerk radicalized atheists routinely asserting that philosophy is meaningless intellectual masturbation. That religion is dishonest, harmful, and should be eliminated. That art exists for nothing more than entertainment purposes. That morality is subjective and otherwise baseless. And that the reasoning behind all these assertions is that to expend intellectual energy on anything besides the quest to better understand functional physicality is an irrelevant and frivolous pursuit.

It's a deeply dehumanizing perspective that, were it held to by people in power, would result is a deeply dehumanizing and inhumane culture.

 

[joe1776]

Can you give me an example of a dangerous atheist thought?

"Religion is the opiate of the people" (?)

 

[lukethethird]

It's not atheist-bashing, actually. It is a critique of one, particular, evangelical, atheist movement led by Dawkins and co.

Dawkins and co seem to be the fundies of the atheist world, devoting a lot of effort to attacking religion, and exporting their ideas that religion is ridiculous and damaging extensively via the media. I think @JustGeorge 's uncle is spot-on when he observes that they've made a religion of it!

I have no problem with atheism in general, or with the physicalism the New Atheists espouse. It seems a perfectly reasonable point of view to take. The principal problem I see with New Atheism is that it attacks religion without seeming to understand what religion really is about. Thus it spends most of its time vigorously attacking a caricature. The focus on demolishing biblical literalism (what, again?), which is just a naive c.19th invention of a handful of Protestant sects, is a case in point. More generally, it seems to make the error of thinking religion is about giving an account of the physical world, rather than understanding that it is first and foremost a guide for living one's life.

And, since the New Atheism spends its time attacking religion, it can hardly object that religion may attack it in return.

Some of those on the list are way off the mark, fabricated. There is plenty to criticize of those four without making stuff up.

 

[Altfish]

"Religion is the opiate of the people" (?)

That was an opinion by Karl Marx, is it really a dangerous thought

 

[lukethethird]

If the Atheist dictator comes for you and yours then your morals are just an opinion between the two of you. There is no ultimate authority in the rouge state of Atheism.

Psychos capitalize atheist.

 

[Audie]

I see these knee-jerk radicalized atheists routinely asserting that philosophy is meaningless intellectual masturbation. That religion is dishonest, harmful, and should be eliminated. That art exists for nothing more than entertainment purposes. That morality is subjective and otherwise baseless. And that the reasoning behind all these assertions is that to expend intellectual energy on anything besides the quest to better understand functional physicality is an irrelevant and frivolous pursuit.

It's a deeply dehumanizing perspective that, were it held to by people in power, would result is a deeply dehumanizing and inhumane culture.

In the predictable absence of examples
it appears the above is in reference to self.

 

[lukethethird]

Atheist have more than disbelief in common, the OP is pointing out how Atheist are not content to coexist with religion, you want to eradicate it from society.

Do you believe that?

 

[joe1776]

That was an opinion by Karl Marx, is it really a dangerous thought

I'd consider it so since its author assisted in triggering communist societies which weakened religion's powerful influence in several societies. But maybe you were thinking of a different definition of "dangerous."

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Can you give me an example of a dangerous atheist thought?

No, because atheism is the lack of belief/disbelief in gods. Yet here it is as how some atheists do it:
"...
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.

Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."
Our Vision

 

[Colt]

Do you believe that?

Yes, I think you quit and are now serving a different master.

 

[RestlessSoul]

"Religion is the opiate of the people" (?)

Yeah, that one needs to be taken in context though. Opium was an over the counter drug in the 19th Century, as freely available as whiskey, and not necessarily considered any more harmful. So Marx’s observation wasn’t quite as damning as it may sound to our ears. Though it’s fair to say he wasn’t a fan, he could as easily have used beer and football for an analogy, as opium.

 

[lukethethird]

I see these knee-jerk radicalized atheists routinely asserting that philosophy is meaningless intellectual masturbation. That religion is dishonest, harmful, and should be eliminated. That art exists for nothing more than entertainment purposes. That morality is subjective and otherwise baseless. And that the reasoning behind all these assertions is that to expend intellectual energy on anything besides the quest to better understand functional physicality is an irrelevant and frivolous pursuit.

It's a deeply dehumanizing perspective that, were it held to by people in power, would result is a deeply dehumanizing and inhumane culture.

Atheist baiting, well, I'm not going to bite other than to ask, what's the matter? You don't seem to be very happy.

 

[lukethethird]

Yes, I think you quit and are now serving a different master.

Haven't you heard it said that herding atheists is like herding cats? It can't be done.

 

[lukethethird]

Yeah, that one needs to be taken in context though. Opium was an over the counter drug in the 19th Century, as freely available as whiskey, and not necessarily considered any more harmful. So Marx’s observation wasn’t quite as damning as it may sound to our ears. Though it’s fair to say he wasn’t a fan, he could as easily have used beer and football for an analogy, as opium.

Opium is dreamy.

 

[lukethethird]

This is not Atheism, it's just a secular based religion. Just because you are atheist does not mean you are free of supernatural beliefs, it doesn't mean you embrace materialism, it doesn't mean you accept reason over belief, or agree with the scientific method. All it means is that you don't believe in God; that's it! But there are people who have made a lot of money and sold a lot of books promoting their brand of atheism; perhaps this is just another way of making money.

Dawkins and crew were raking it in touring the lecture circuit and selling books. They were in it for the money and they rode that wave to the shoreline.

 

[Mock Turtle]

You genuinely think they have a good track record on such things?

From what I have read of theirs, I didn't see so much of this, even if they did come across as perhaps being as certain as so many with religious beliefs are. Nowt wrong with that, but not my way.

 

[lukethethird]

Can you give me an example of a dangerous atheist thought?

I can, "I don't believe you."

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You are a part of tacitly undermining religion. The OP is about people who are open about it.

Speaking truth as one sees it is "undermining?" Then religion is explictly -- not tacitly -- undermining science, every time it makes a claim that is manifestly untrue but dogmatically assumed to be correct anyway.