The New Atheists....

[Alceste]

I totally agree. I don't know whether to blame the "New Atheists", though. I blame the decline of education and literacy in general. A lot of people just don't know what the **** they are talking about these days, no matter which "side" they're on.

It doesn't help that mixed in with the "information" we assimilate is a whopping dose of "misinformation", often presented in the same or similar style and format to enhance its credibility.

On top of this, we are also suffering from the effects of too much information, too fast, too brief, too shallow, and too sensational. TV, newspaper, internet, radio, blogs, twitters, facebook groups, magazines... It takes real concentration to actually learn anything in this context. A decent piece of journalism, IMO, is at least 5 full pages and has taken several months to put together, including research.

As a result, people have ended up with a collection of opinions with depths ranging from "bumper sticker" to "index card". Instead of knowing a lot about a few things, they know very little about a lot of things.

So, I think people in general are getting stupider, atheists included. I'm a little sick of people blaming Dawkins and his ilk for the stupidity of stupid atheists. They have nothing to do with my atheist stupidity. My atheist stupidity is MINE. I haven't even read those guys, except Hitchens, whose stupidity is utterly different from mine.

One thing I will say is that it is mighty suspicious that my dad, after reading Hitchens, now has begun to sound like Hitchens. He's started lumping all religions together and arguing things like "If you believe in God, you'll believe in ANYTHING, and start following orders from authority unquestioningly" and a whole bunch of other BS like that. (And he was once in seminary, studying to become a minister!) However, my dad ALWAYS starts talking like whoever he's been reading, regardless of the topic.

One more thing, I have noticed a lot of people come in here with an axe to grind. They've got a crapload of stupid things they're just bursting to get off their chest and they CAN'T WAIT to get started right away, without reading any existing threads. That applies to religious and non-religious people in equal proportions. For every "the Bible is factually incorrect therefore religion is delusional" post there is a corresponding "you're going to have to face your God one day whether you believe in him or not so you'd better hope you're right", or an "atheism is a belief system". Or both.

Yeah. People are stupid. * kicks imaginary stupid people *. (PMS is stupid too.)

 

[whereismynotecard]

Wowza... I haven't been here much over the past few weeks... so I haven't seen what you're talking about, but I am well aware of the fact that some atheists have a dickwad way about them, like this guy I know from school. Any time he talks to anyone about anything, he has to squeeze some *****ing about religion into the conversation. Even if we aren't talking about religion at all!

But here's the good news... Maybe some ****** atheists have arrived, but so has a dancing banana, at last!! :danana:

 

[monta]

A lot of atheists join the forums with their guns blazing, itching for a fight, they usually settle down after a couple of weeks.

They are likely young and will learn that not everyone is out to get them, not every theist is a Christian,not every Christian is a moron, and that regurgitating bellyfulls of Dawkins and/or Hitchens on everyone is childish and hypocritical, or they will leave.

The forums need an injection of new blood from time to time or they will stagnate, I am not here long but am happy to see new people, even when I am rolling my eyes and sighing.

 

[gnomon]

I agree with linwood.

Except for blaming it on the New Atheists. The generalities used to argue points I've heard for a long time. Expecting today's Christians to answer for the Crusades, the Inquisition or other such nonsense. Completely ignoring the role of religion as a means to transfer cultural views or even accounting for the variety of religious forms and beliefs.

There's a difference between analyzing the role of religious beliefs on issues such as marriage equality and healthcare. In such a case fully criticizing religious beliefs is not only fair game but a necessity. However, consistently attacking someone simply for having faith is more akin to stomping on puppies and kittens.

Generalities are usually the problem. In any discussion. Laying out an argument with some facts to evaluate would go a long way to improving the forums. Also, admitting when you don't know or may be wrong would do so as well. I know my frustration when people fail to recognize certain facts, even after I repeatedly offer evidence for those facts, leads me to start reaching out and slamming down anyone on any issue who throws out generalized fallacies.

Which is my problem and I should apologize to someone right now.

 

[MissAlice]

I'm having trouble with this only because I'm confused when this topic implies "New Atheists". I don't believe I've condesceded people to a point of personal attacks. Then again I'm confused as my sense of humor comes off dryly sarcastic. So these topics are still confusing me even though I believe one person answered me.

I do however know in part what the OP means. I've also found myself arguing among atheists b/c in some forums, you can't have any discussion or open dialogue with those of a belief system. It's the kind of condescending and ridicule that implies that it does not matter what that person of a faith has to say they are wrong and delusional for even putting forth their feelings regarding a relationship or concept of a spirit and a divinity. I mostly find myself questioning what the definition of god is since I think it can take on many meanings without it being so much about blind faith.

But still, I'm not sure what's being implied here. I'm still fairly new and do not know what could be seen as hurtful to a religious segment. Looking at some of the threads, I have to say I also see arguements among people of faith themselves so I'm having trouble comprehending why it's wrong for atheists or anyone with lack of faith not to debate with those of faith. Faith can mean anyone including atheists.....even though they don't want to admit it. So does this mean atheists can only argue what is conveniant among the religious sect?

My own belief is freedom of speech which means I think everyone is allowed to argue given where it is appropriate. The only thing I could see offensive is if one person ridicules another without substantial reasoning or validation. For example, name calling is just as childish as one arguing about how right they are because the other's wrong without anything to back up their claim.

Anyway, I guess what bothers me about this topic is the sheer generalization of atheists and then ones who are new to the forum. Reminds me like most forums that they aren't invited here b/c they're new and have a system of thoughts.."beliefs" much different from their religious counterparts. I really don't see a huge difference since even religious people have beliefs with differing views and opinions so......

 

[linwood]

I'm having trouble with this only because I'm confused when this topic implies "New Atheists". I don't believe I've condesceded people to a point of personal attacks. Then again I'm confused as my sense of humor comes off dryly sarcastic. So these topics are still confusing me even though I believe one person answered me.

Your confusion is entirely my fault and I apologize.
The title of the OP "New Atheists" isn`t meant to refer to any new atheists to this forum.
There are numerous cultural media outlets using the term "New Atheists" to describe what they see as an upsurge in atheist numbers and philosophy.
I borrowed their phrase to make a point and failed miserably which I should have known would happen the moment I decided to utilize the medias viewpoint for analogy.
Again, the confusion is entirely my fault and I do regret my wording.

It's the kind of condescending and ridicule that implies that it does not matter what that person of a faith has to say they are wrong and delusional for even putting forth their feelings regarding a relationship or concept of a spirit and a divinity.

Yes the condescending attitudes I`m seeing are the point of this OP entirely.
I think we can get our points across without the attitude and in most cases we can get it across much more effectively without the attitude.

But still, I'm not sure what's being implied here. I'm still fairly new and do not know what could be seen as hurtful to a religious segment. Looking at some of the threads, I have to say I also see arguements among people of faith themselves so I'm having trouble comprehending why it's wrong for atheists or anyone with lack of faith not to debate with those of faith.

There is nothing wrong with debating theists and after you`re here for awhile you`ll see I don`t have any trouble debating theistic concepts with anyone.
It is a large reason for the very existence of this forum.

I`m not even saying you have to be nice while debating.
I`d just appreciate a little more basic civility.

My problem is with the method of debate I`m seeing.
It seems childish and self defeating to me to a great extent.

I`m at work guys so I don`t have a lot of time to reply to the very good responses I`ve gotten here.
I just wanted to take a moment apologize to Alice (and anyone else who misunderstood my confusing statement.)and clarify my cloudy OP.

I`ll post more when I get home tonight.

Thanks,

Edit:

Alice,
When I use the term "you" in my responses I`m not implying you personally.
In fact I don`t believe my OP applies to you at all.

 

[themadhair]

Perhaps the OP could cite examples of what they find objectionable? At the moment this discussion is rather vague.

 

[Alceste]

I've got an example - some seem to find it difficult to resist jumping on any statement regarding the "hot-button" issues (i.e. evolution and gay marriage), no matter how ridiculous, regardless of the topic or tone of the thread, or the section it's in.

IMO, there have been some good discussions ruined by militant atheists being drawn en masse to the dumbest statements by fundamentalists like moths to the flame. I know it's hard, but there's really no point. A fundamentalist's idiocy is only affirmed by "persecution", and everybody else already knows what they've said is idiotic, so what's the point of arguing?

"Never argue with an idiot - they will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience". (Dunno who said that).

 

[linwood]

Perhaps the OP could cite examples of what they find objectionable? At the moment this discussion is rather vague.

I was kind of hoping no one would ask me to support my position with actual evidence.

Yes, I could cite examples but I won`t.
I realize this makes my position in this discussion pretty weak but I was hoping y`all would have seen what I`m talking about (As some of you here have stated you do)as I don`t wish to point out any examples because it would only lead to individual personal argument.

I can give some vague examples though.

I`ve recently seen atheists throwing completely unnecessary nasty barbs at the theists such as Dawny, Buttons, and Christine.
These theists simply don`t deserve this treatment regardless of what I think of the foundations of their beliefs.

To their credit they each and every one handle themselves very well when they are attacked in the foul manner I`ve described.
They shouldn`t have to however and I wouldn`t blame them if they didn`t handle it as well as they do.

 

[linwood]

Ok so I`ve finally got a little time to answer everyone`s posts in a bit of depth.

In order to change someone's attitude and intellect they must be influenced and educated, so if there is to be change here then people will need to post in a way that influences the way other atheists think and feel. Are you willing? I'm relatively new here, so I'm not saying that you aren't an influence, because I don't know yet. Just saying that this is either a whine post or it will be a foundation that you'll build upon. Calling people out does nothing unless you help redirect them.

You`re entirely correct and no, I`m not much of an influence here.

However I`m not posting this OP just to whine as it was my hope when I posted it that I wasn`t the only atheist who had noticed the change in tone of atheistic posting and thought perhaps we could all discuss it and maybe we could all give it some deeper thought.

I myself have already recognized some shallow beliefs I`ve held on the subject through the postings of others here as I`ll get to in a minute.

I do however feel as if I already make a habit of posting respectfully towards theists (Unless I`m being disrespected)and I think this can be seen in my posts.

Now, I`m not perfect, I get frustrated and I screw up so coming in here pointing out what a hypocrite I am because you found a post where I was displaying the attitude I`m now *****ing about isn`t fair.

We all get frustrated and I`ve overlooked more than a few irrational outbursts by people who I expect better of because they`re human.

What I`m complaining about is the seeming consistency this type of posting is beginning to have.

Here`s a tip.

If you`re ****** off at someone and even if they may very well deserve to be lit into go ahead and type out that nasty post.
Make it as nasty as you can and then improve on the nastiness.

Then hit "preview post" and have a look at what you just wrote.

Then go have a smoke or a coke and think about it for a second.

Come back to the computer and let Occam`s Razor guide your editing and simply remove the parts that are directed towards the person and not the OP.

You`ll often find a much more rational meaningful post on your screen once you do finally hit that "submit reply" button.

.... I don't know whether to blame the "New Atheists", though.

You`re entirely right.

Blaming the Horsemen for the behavior of their followers is akin to blaming the writers of the gospel for the behavior of their followers.
With the possible exception of Hitchen`s I`ve never seen any of them speak in public in a derogatory manner.
I`ll withdraw the implication as it seems you`ve corrected me yet again Alceste.

It doesn't help that mixed in with the "information" we assimilate is a whopping dose of "misinformation", often presented in the same or similar style and format to enhance its credibility.

On top of this, we are also suffering from the effects of too much information, too fast, too brief, too shallow, and too sensational.

Agreed but this is even more reason why the atheist needs to exercise his/her skills for skepticism and rationality in a more effective manner than ever before.

We tend to use Sagan`s "Baloney detector" against those things that we don`t like to hear and let those things that agree with us have a free pass.

That was another point of my OP.
We seem to spend a hell of a lot of time thinking about those things we disbelieve and not enough practicing those things we do believe in.
How very Christian of us.

So, I think people in general are getting stupider, atheists included. I'm a little sick of people blaming Dawkins and his ilk for the stupidity of stupid atheists. They have nothing to do with my atheist stupidity. My atheist stupidity is MINE. I haven't even read those guys, except Hitchens, whose stupidity is utterly different from mine.

OK OK I concede already!
I`ll never say it again.

One thing I will say is that it is mighty suspicious that my dad, after reading Hitchens, now has begun to sound like Hitchens.

I think we all do this to some extent and it`s the behavior I`m talking about and the reason for my linking The Horsemen to the phenomena.

This can be fixed through some painful self evaluation.
Can we do that?
I dunno, I try to.

But here's the good news... Maybe some ****** atheists have arrived, but so has a dancing banana, at last!!

Actually, it may sound funny but the dancing banana does make me happier.

A lot of atheists join the forums with their guns blazing, itching for a fight, they usually settle down after a couple of weeks.
.........
The forums need an injection of new blood from time to time or they will stagnate, I am not here long but am happy to see new people, even when I am rolling my eyes and sighing.

You`re right Monta and after giving it some thought the object of my complaint isn`t really anything new.
I guess it`s just that there has been such a large infusion of new atheist members lately that I`m seeing it everywhere all of a sudden.

I agree with linwood.

Except for blaming it on the New Atheists.

Conceded.
:foot:

There's a difference between analyzing the role of religious beliefs on issues such as marriage equality and healthcare. In such a case fully criticizing religious beliefs is not only fair game but a necessity. However, consistently attacking someone simply for having faith is more akin to stomping on puppies and kittens.

Yes, why complain about the irrationality of faith when homosexual rights are the here and now?
This goes to relevance.
I agree.

Generalities are usually the problem.

Yes, if we are going to make sense in our arguments we should debate a particular point that has actual meaning to the beliefs being debated.

We complain about the No True Christian fallacy yet we argue towards Christians as if there were only one single stripe of Christian.
Hell, sometimes we throw Muslims in with Christians just because it seems easy to do.

I'm having trouble with this only because I'm confused when this topic implies "New Atheists". ...

I`d like to apologize for the implications of my poor wording yet again Alice.
I did not intend to offend you or imply you have been anything other than respectful here as I have seen no reason to think so.
I am truly sorry if I made you feel unwelcome because I am happy to have you here.
We atheists historically have been speaking from a very small minority position here for a long time.
I don`t want to chase away intelligent atheist minds from this forum.

I've got an example - some seem to find it difficult to resist jumping on any statement regarding the "hot-button" issues (i.e. evolution and gay marriage), no matter how ridiculous, regardless of the topic or tone of the thread, or the section it's in.

Yes, why discuss (yet again) the obviously inconsistent genealogy of Christ when we can discuss how it got there in the first place?
What are the implications within the text?
Why did the author feel as if he needed to make a particular point?

Can we get just a little bit deeper in our debate topics than Biblical inconsistencies?

I`m guilty of this myself, there`s nothing I like better than to watch a theist squirm over the harmonization of the death of Judas and I`m not saying you shouldn`t do so.
If and when the theist brings it up blast him..I don`t care, he`s earned the blasting for bringing it up.

But why start an OP that has been beaten to death millions of times before?
Do we not have the intellectual fortitude to at the very least try to get farther into our criticisms of theology?

Is anyone who is willing to defend the truth of Noahs flood really worth the time it takes to debate them?

Again, I`m not saying you should never answer these topics.
When they`re brought up give your opinion and the support you have for that opinion but when the theist seems likely to debate you to the death that the trinity makes perfect sense just drop it.

Why argue with a fool?
It always ends in nastiness.

Now I want to tell y`all that I`ve been guilty of everything I`ve been *****ing about in this thread to one extent or another.
I guess I`m going to have to give my own behavior some more thought.

I`d simply like the rest of you to do so too.

 

[whereismynotecard]

A lot of atheists join the forums with their guns blazing, itching for a fight, they usually settle down after a couple of weeks.

They are likely young and will learn that not everyone is out to get them, not every theist is a Christian,not every Christian is a moron, and that regurgitating bellyfulls of Dawkins and/or Hitchens on everyone is childish and hypocritical, or they will leave.

The forums need an injection of new blood from time to time or they will stagnate, I am not here long but am happy to see new people, even when I am rolling my eyes and sighing.

When I first came here, it was to start some ****. I thought that this forum would be full of the sort of religious people who are intolerant and mean and I joined just so I could tell them all off and get banned. I think one of my first posts was about how the world would be a better place if people would stop discriminating against other people, specifically gay people. I figured that there were only intolerant jerks here and that we'd have a bit of an argument and then I'd get banned. But I didn't. :danana: So I stayed and we've gotten along great. Except for a few people a couple times...

 

[Alceste]

I`ll withdraw the implication as it seems you`ve corrected me yet again Alceste.

Excellent.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

.... are ********

I`ve been cruising around RF for the past few weeks and I gotta tell you I`m not particularly impressed with this "Atheistic Revival" we`ve supposedly got going on here.

If this is what the Four Horsemen have spawned it`s just confirmation of my distaste for their religious writings and/or intellects.

A few examples of some absolutely irrational insights from those who hold themselves as the most rational.

*Atheists debating against the concepts of the Abrahamic faith in discussions where the Abrahamic faiths aren`t the point.

Do you guys know there are other religions in the world?

*Atheists using the argument from authority concerning science and scientific models with a dogmatic fervor that would make the Pope blush.

Do you guys know that Hawkings and Weinberg did NOT themselves create the universe in their images?

*Atheists simply being condescendingly rude.

This last one should come as a shocker from me as I have been known to be quite the ******* on this forum at times towards theistic claptrap.
The difference is I usually wait until someone has actually done something to deserve being *****-slapped BEFORE I tear into them.

Y`all ain`t making any converts.

You`re forcing theists to reinforce the walls of ignorance while reinforcing atheist stereotypes many have worked to dispel.

I think we should keep in mind that people are often at different stages along whatever paths they're following. Many younger, or newer, atheists go through the same phases, and become less reactionary as they gain more experience, and learn to put things in a broader context.

To be fair, it seems we're getting just as many immature/intellectually shallow theists as atheists lately.

 

[Atreyu]

Yes, atheist do often get a bad reputation for their mouth. No different than Christains getting a bad reputation for their hypocricy.

 

[MissAlice]

Excellent.

Mine comes in a pink...

 

[Smoke]

I may be rude and obnoxious at times, but I think most of the time I manage to reserve that behavior for people who have it coming. I don't think, in any case, that you can blame Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris for the behavior of every atheist on the internet. I don't even think you can blame Christopher Hitchens; the fact that he's a belligerent old sot is no excuse for every atheist to follow suit.

 

[Alceste]

Mine comes in a pink...

And winks! You win. :bow:

 

[linwood]

Excellent.

Sometimes it feels so good to be wrong.

I think we should keep in mind that people are often at different stages along whatever paths they're following. Many younger, or newer, atheists go through the same phases, and become less reactionary as they gain more experience, and learn to put things in a broader context.

To be fair, it seems we're getting just as many immature/intellectually shallow theists as atheists lately.

That`s pretty much where the posters in this thread have guided my thinking on this.
After some thought on the input here I`ve come to see this is most probably the case.

Knowing this now, can those of us who have have realized that you catch more flies with honey say something when we see some of the issues discussed here happening in other posts?

It doesn`t have to be a big deal or debate.
If you see an atheist abusing someone or spouting these fallacies just say something like "I thought that was a little too rough " or "I think you should think about that statement a bit more".

I`m already seeing some non-theists making these statements, many who have posted in this thread actually so maybe I`m preaching to the choir.

I just think a little gentle correction coming from someone who shares their point of view goes a lot farther with them than the opinion of someone who doesn`t.
Unfortunately we`re all like that to an extent.

Thanks for the input on this thread people.

 

[Diederick]

I don't really think you can generalize this much about Atheists, since we don't really organize and thereby are mere individuals chipping away at global religions.

And I agree with atotalstranger that these individuals go through similar stages of growth. I know I've grown since I first came here, but I'm not sure I've become less rude.

This was a good thread.

 

[MSizer]

This was a good thread.

I don't think it was. I found it very insulting that linwood should make such a general unfounded lash of the tongue at all of us. His rudeness is unacceptable, and I almost wish hell did exist for mean atheists like linwood.

8^)