What does "atheist fundamentalism" mean?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There's been a bit of a side discussion in another thread (http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/comparative-religion/158960-why-do-you-do.html) that I think deserves more focus.

On many occasions, I've heard people say things like "I disagree with fundamentalism, whether from theists or atheists." However, whenever I've asked these people what they mean by "atheist fundamentalism" or for some examples of what they're talking about, I've never really gotten a reply. At best, they rattle off names of people they considered "atheist fundamentalists" (e.g. Richard Dawkins or Madalyn Murray O'Hair) as if we're supposed to automatically recognize their fundamentalism, but don't actually explain what about them or what they say is supposed to be "fundamentalist".

I have a view about these sorts of tactics, which I mentioned in that other thread:

In my experience, if you took the most inoffensive liberal pastor's most inoffensive and boring sermon in praise of faith and rewrote it to be just as strongly against faith instead, you'd have something much worse than what people typically label as "atheist fundamentalism".

So... can anyone give any actual examples of atheist fundamentalism? Statements that you consider to be fundamentalist?

Also, do you agree with my assessment, i.e. that people tend to be much more eager to slap the "fundamentalist" label on statements (and people) against faith than those in favour of it?

 

[Quirkybird]

To me all atheism is just the disbelief in the existence of any deity, and no big deal.

 

[Revoltingest]

From dictionary.com....

fun·da·men·tal·ism

[fuhn-duh-men-tl-iz-uh

m] Show IPA
noun 1. ( sometimes initial capital letter ) a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism and that stresses the infallibility of the Bible not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record, holding as essential to Christian faith belief in such doctrines as the creation of the world, the virgin birth, physical resurrection, atonement by the sacrificial death of Christ, and the Second Coming.

2. the beliefs held by those in this movement.

3. strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.

Origin:
1920–25, Americanism; fundamental + -ism

But an emerging use of "fundamentalism" is the derogatory application to anyone with excessive fervor.
What are the fundamentals of atheism?
There is only one, ie, disbelief in gods.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Also, do you agree with my assessment, i.e. that people tend to be much more eager to slap the "fundamentalist" label on statements (and people) against faith than those in favour of it?

I honestly do not know how you came to this conclusion. Perhaps I'm misreading it. In my experience the term is most frequently applied to streams of Christianity.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I honestly do not know how you came to this conclusion. Perhaps I'm misreading it. In my experience the term is most frequently applied to streams of Christianity.

In mine too. However, I've seen people refer to "atheist fundamentalism" and "fundamentalist atheists" here on RF many times and I'd like to know what these people mean by the term.

Edit: but what I said also applies to the tendency to label atheists and atheist ideas with "offensive", "intolerant", or other epithets. To me, the bar seems to be much lower for atheism than theism. IMO, the theist equivalent of someone like Richard Dawkins would be a liberal theologian who would generally be considered somewhere between "too boring" and "too liberal".

 

[MysticSang'ha]

From dictionary.com....
But an emerging use of "fundamentalism" is the derogatory application to anyone with excessive fervor.
What are the fundamentals of atheism?
There is only one, ie, disbelief in gods.

That's what I see from it too. It might be the confusion between "evangelism" and "fundamentalism."

Perhaps what people are referring to is what they see as "atheist evangelist propaganda." Where they see atheists spreading the word of the non-gospel.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From dictionary.com....
But an emerging use of "fundamentalism" is the derogatory application to anyone with excessive fervor.
What are the fundamentals of atheism?
There is only one, ie, disbelief in gods.

To me, it often tends to be used as an interchangeable synonym for "extremist". But the people labelled as atheist "extremists" tend - AFAICT - to stick to things like suggesting that society might be better off if fewer people went to church.

When someone suggests that society might be better off if more people went to church, nobody bats an eye.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's what I see from it too. It might be the confusion between "evangelism" and "fundamentalism."

Perhaps what people are referring to is what they see as "atheist evangelist propaganda." Where they see atheists spreading the word of the non-gospel.

It also strikes me as clever. Fundamentalism has come to be popularly disrespected,
so to tag atheists with this epithet is an insult, albeit an ironic one.


Who cares about insults?

My name is Revoltingest, & I am a fundamentalist atheist because I don't believe in gods.

 

[LuisDantas]

I assume my take on the matter is clear enough from the other thread.

 

[ametist]

'faith has no value, it is supersition' can be considered a fundamentalist atheist attitude. Where we should all belong eventually and my faith is that we will.

 

[Revoltingest]

'faith has no value, it is supersition' can be considered a fundamentalist atheist attitude.

It is not fundamental to atheism to make the underlined claim.
Some believe it. Some of us don't.

And I know wherefrom I speak, for I am a fundamentalist atheist.
Want proof? See post #8.

 

[LuisDantas]

'faith has no value, it is supersition' can be considered a fundamentalist atheist attitude.

I guess it can. But should it? And what does it actually mean or imply?

Myself, I think talking about fundamental atheism makes as little sense as talking about fundamental lack of interest in, say, bowling.

There is only so much room for "excess".

Where we should all belong eventually and my faith is that we will.

Sorry, I did not understand what you mean here.

 

[Iti oj]

I think it is meant as anti theist.

 

[Levite]

As I just said over in the other thread:

Fundamentalism is essentially an absolutist and exclusivist position, combined with an aggressive tendency to proselytize that position, and to deride the positions of others.

In other words, a belief that one is absolutely right, that all other positions are wrong, and an aggressive willingness to try and change other people's minds to conform with one's own "right" belief, and to insult and demean those who do not agree.

This attitude is found in religious extremists and in atheist extremists. It is not about belief in God, but about extremism.

 

[crossfire]

That's what I see from it too. It might be the confusion between "evangelism" and "fundamentalism."

Perhaps what people are referring to is what they see as "atheist evangelist propaganda." Where they see atheists spreading the word of the non-gospel.

Actually, evangelicals will participate in activities with others who don't share their beliefs, whereas fundamentalists will generally refuse to participate in activities with those who do not share their beliefs, and might go so far as to attempt to quash such activities. (A bit of aversion going on amongst fundamentalists.)

 

[LuisDantas]

I think it is meant as anti theist.

It seems to be.

And even then it is both unfair and illogical.

Perhaps it comes from some sort of reflex reaction to a bred attitude that religion must not be criticized.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

To me, the bar seems to be much lower for atheism than theism.

Perhaps. I know that I expect those who purport to be defenders of reason to do an adequate job exhibiting that quality. Many do. Some come across as petty zealots.

IMO, the theist equivalent of someone like Richard Dawkins would be a liberal theologian ...

I do not agree.

 

[LuisDantas]

This attitude is found in (...) atheist extremists. It is not about belief in God, but about extremism.

Tell me more about that. I fail to even conceive how that could be the case, frankly.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As I just said over in the other thread:

Fundamentalism is essentially an absolutist and exclusivist position, combined with an aggressive tendency to proselytize that position, and to deride the positions of others.

In other words, a belief that one is absolutely right, that all other positions are wrong, and an aggressive willingness to try and change other people's minds to conform with one's own "right" belief, and to insult and demean those who do not agree.

This attitude is found in religious extremists and in atheist extremists. It is not about belief in God, but about extremism.

In the OP, I asked for specific examples. Can you give some actual quotes that you think demonstrate what you describe?

 

[LuisDantas]

Perhaps. I know that I expect those who purport to be defenders of reason to do an adequate job exhibiting that quality. Many do. Some come across as petty zealots.

I do not agree.

Must an atheist or anti-theist be, or present itself as a defender of reason to be within his rights, though? I fail to see how or why.