Why Arrogant "New Atheists" Annoy Me

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

No one said that challenging religion (whatever that's supposed to mean, regardless of how laughable that sounds) or calling out religion-based bigotry was wrong. I'm basically saying that they're often very ignorant of religion in terms of its diversity, scientific and historical origins, its social role and suchlike in the first place. Granted, most people tend to be pretty ignorant about religion. I can only roll my eyes when I see a New Atheist arguing against a fundie Christian.

Yeah, Ghandi is problematic but so is Jesus. He said and did things I view as wrong.

So you're complaining that lots of new atheists are just flat out ignorant of the breadth of religions there are and what they do?

Are you complaining that they aren't *****ing about Jainism or something? Is the fact that they rail on Christianity and Islam, mainly, a problem for you?

Do you know how many people have lived and died in the history of mankind?

Statisticians have run the numbers, and since the dawn of mankind, this earth has seen over 107 billion people come and go.

They came and went for a lot of different reasons, but one of those reasons happens to be religion...

Throughout history, billions of people have died FOR their religion, IN THE NAME of their religion, and in an effort to COMPLETELY DESTROY other people's religions...

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So you're complaining that lots of new atheists are just flat out ignorant of the breadth of religions there are and what they do?

Are you complaining that they aren't *****ing about Jainism or something? Is the fact that they rail on Christianity and Islam, mainly, a problem for you?

Do you know how many people have lived and died in the history of mankind?

Statisticians have run the numbers, and since the dawn of mankind, this earth has seen over 107 billion people come and go.

They came and went for a lot of different reasons, but one of those reasons happens to be religion...

Throughout history, billions of people have died <b>for</b> their religion, <b>in the name</b> of their religion, and in an effort to <b>completely destroy</b> other people's religions...

Yes, I'm not happy that they tend to conflate all of religion with what is really Christian and Islamic fundamentalism. They even ignore moderate and liberal forms of those religions (or, worse, imply they are less sincere than their more aggressive counterparts). It's basically a caricature. Even on these forums, they tend to assume if you are a theist, you are referring to the Christian god. When you say otherwise, they often have no idea what to say to you because they have no clue what you believe.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Yes, I'm not happy that they tend to conflate all of religion with what is really Christian and Islamic fundamentalism. They even ignore moderate and liberal forms of those religions (or, worse, imply they are less sincere than their more aggressive counterparts). It's basically a caricature. Even on these forums, they tend to assume if you are a theist, you are referring to the Christian god. When you say otherwise, they often have no idea what to say to you because they have no clue what you believe.

When considering the truth of a proposition, one is either engaged in an honest appraisal of the evidence and logical arguments, or one isn't. Religion is one area of our lives where people imagine that some other standard of intellectual integrity applies.
Sam Harris

I often hear that the way to fix these fundamentalists is to expose them to more moderate religious views, but fundamentalists are all pretty much alike psychologically whether they're Christian or Muslim, or whatever other religion you want to talk about...

I think this thinking is completely wrong and doesn't resolve the issue.

I think we can both agree that the answer to alcoholism is NOT to drink more moderately, to cut back and to binge less. That the REAL answer is to no longer drink alcohol.

In the same vein, the answer to religious fundamentalism is NOT religious moderation. The REAL answer is to no longer be religious...

To only use reason and logic and evidence to make claims about things. To abhor religious dogma no matter what form it takes.

Religions, and superstitious people who act religious about a belief, do dumb things BECAUSE OF/ON BEHALF OF their religious and superstitious beliefs.

 

[Augustus]

Throughout history, billions of people have died FOR their religion, IN THE NAME of their religion, and in an effort to COMPLETELY DESTROY other people's religions...

Billions??

I'd love to see the maths for that...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's a very Western-centric viewpont of it.

No, I was giving global statistics.

Edit: a relevant quote from my link below, if you think that “Abrahamic” = “Western”:

The Asia-Pacific region also is home to most of the world’s Muslims (62%). About 20% of Muslims live in the Middle East and North Africa, and nearly 16% reside in sub-Saharan Africa.

There are literally billions of people who are not members of the Abrahamic religions.

About 1.9 billion, as of the most recent estimate I found in a quick Google search.

The Global Religious Landscape

And there are 3.8 billion Christians and Muslims. The #3 religion - Hinduism - only accounts for 15% if the world’s population. Buddhism accounts for 7.1%. For every person who belongs to a Dharmic religion, there are two people who belong to Abrahamic religions.

Only 7% of the people on the planet belong to a religion other than the Abrahamics and Dharmics, and the vast majority of that 7% practice traditional Chinese folk religion. Everything else - including Paganism, traditional Native American religion, Sikhism, etc., only make up a couple of percent of the total religious picture... all together.

I prefer not to feed the already monsterously bloated egos of Christianity and Islam by not letting them pretend they are the archetype of religion when it is actually them that are the misfits according to the number and forms of religion.

I don’t believe in archetypes. I certainly don’t think there’s an archetype for religion.

By thinking they represent religion, you empower them and further disenfranchise religious minorities.

They do represent religion. So do you. And by giving each religious person equal weight, the sum total of what “religion” means is two-thirds Abrahamic.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I often hear that the way to fix these fundamentalists is to expose them to more moderate religious views, but fundamentalists are all pretty much alike psychologically whether they're Christian or Muslim, or whatever other religion you want to talk about...

I think this thinking is completely wrong and doesn't resolve the issue.

I think we can both agree that the answer to alcoholism is NOT to drink more moderately, to cut back and to binge less. That the REAL answer is to no longer drink alcohol.

In the same vein, the answer to religious fundamentalism is NOT religious moderation. The REAL answer is to no longer be religious...

To only use reason and logic and evidence to make claims about things. To abhor religious dogma no matter what form it takes.

Religions, and superstitious people who act religious about a belief, do dumb things BECAUSE OF/ON BEHALF OF their religious and superstitious beliefs.

You're not winning me over by quoting Sam Harris to me. I strongly dislike him.

Are you saying that we should all give up religion because of religious fundamentalists?

Humans have never been entirely animals of reason and logic, regardless of religion or of religion, theism or atheism. We're rarely all that rational, especially in groups.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, I was giving global statistics.

Edit: a relevant quote from my link below, if you think that “Abrahamic” = “Western”:

The Asia-Pacific region also is home to most of the world’s Muslims (62%). About 20% of Muslims live in the Middle East and North Africa, and nearly 16% reside in sub-Saharan Africa.


About 1.9 billion, as of the most recent estimate I found in a quick Google search.

The Global Religious Landscape

And there are 3.8 billion Christians and Muslims. The #3 religion - Hinduism - only accounts for 15% if the world’s population. Buddhism accounts for 7.1%. For every person who belongs to a Dharmic religion, there are two people who belong to Abrahamic religions.

Only 7% of the people on the planet belong to a religion other than the Abrahamics and Dharmics, and the vast majority of that 7% practice traditional Chinese folk religion. Everything else - including Paganism, traditional Native American religion, Sikhism, etc., only make up a couple of percent of the total religious picture... all together.


I don’t believe in archetypes. I certainly don’t think there’s an archetype for religion.


They do represent religion. So do you. And by giving each religious person equal weight, the sum total of what “religion” means is two-thirds Abrahamic.

Let's put it this way: when on a forum as diverse as this is, it's best not to use a very narrow example of religion to generalize about all religion. Not doing that would be a great start.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Let's put it this way: when on a forum as diverse as this is, it's best not to use a very narrow example of religion to generalize about all religion. Not doing that would be a great start.

Who do you think is doing that?

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Billions??

I'd love to see the maths for that...

How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth? – Population Reference Bureau

There is the math on how we came to the number (pay attention to table 1)

That being said, let us say that only 5% of the people that have ever lived died because of religious reasons... That is 5 billion people who have died.

I think the number is much higher actually because if you think about it in depth, you can attribute tons of deaths of people to religious and superstitious thinking.

Think about people who believe that faith and prayer alone can heal them of whatever malady they're afflicted with. I know some like to talk about stories where they've been healed through prayer, giving anecdotal evidence such as they had cancer and couldn't afford a doctor so they prayed and were healed, etc... But how many people have just tried to pray an illness away and actually died because of that belief?

It's probably a heck of a lot more people.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Who do you think is doing that?

The New Atheist types we're discussing, obviously. I just pointed out @Drizzt Do'Urden has been doing it above.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

You're not winning me over by quoting Sam Harris to me. I strongly dislike him.

Are you saying that we should all give up religion because of religious fundamentalists?

Humans have never been entirely animals of reason and logic, regardless of religion or of religion, theism or atheism. We're rarely all that rational, especially in groups.

Well, I'm sorry you dislike him, but it doesn't lessen the truth of his statement. People DO hold religion to a different standard of evidence "You just gotta have faith"

Anyway, do I think that a world without religion would be a world without war and strife?

Certainly not! But at least the wars and strife would be over real and tangible things instead of whose fairy tale about god is more right.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Well, I'm sorry you dislike him, but it doesn't lessen the truth of his statement. People DO hold religion to a different standard of evidence "You just gotta have faith"

Anyway, do I think that a world without religion would be a world without war and strife?

Certainly not! But at least the wars and strife would be over real and tangible things instead of whose fairy tale about god is more right.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

By thinking they represent religion, you empower them and further disenfranchise religious minorities.

Since you say you care about disenfranchisement: the third-largest group from the stats I linked to is “unaffiliated” - people with no religion. Not necessarily atheists, but not adherents to any religion.

By attaching rights to religiosity, not only do we often disenfranchise minority religions, but we also necessarily disenfranchise the non-religious. It’s much better, IMO, to recognize that “religious freedom” is just one specific expression of rights like freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, etc., that should apply to everyone.

I’m a firm supporter of making rights not contingent on religion at all, so I really don’t see any necessary link between whether a person’s religion is “mainstream” and what rights they should have.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

The New Atheist types we're discussing, obviously. I just pointed out @Drizzt Do'Urden has been doing it above.

I'm not an atheist, actually.

I'm a deist.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The New Atheist types we're discussing, obviously. I just pointed out @Drizzt Do'Urden has been doing it above.

Ah - so you were mischaracterizing.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

LOL!

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Since you say you care about disenfranchisement: the third-largest group from the stats I linked to is “unaffiliated” - people with no religion. Not necessarily atheists, but not adherents to any religion.

By attaching rights to religiosity, not only do we often disenfranchise minority religions, but we also necessarily disenfranchise the non-religious. It’s much better, IMO, to recognize that “religious freedom” is just one specific expression of rights like freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, etc., that should apply to everyone.

I’m a firm supporter of making rights not contingent on religion at all, so I really don’t see any necessary link between whether a person’s religion is “mainstream” and what rights they should have.

Of course, but by presenting certain forms of Christianity and Islam as representative of all religion, it promotes a certain viewpoint. Basically, Christianity and Islam (and their offshoots like the Baha'i cult) tend to be supremacist religions, believing themselves to be superior to all other worldviews. They want to be the representatives and measuring stick of religion. New Atheists, in their ignorance, are basically going along with that.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Ah - so you were mischaracterizing.

I'm a New Atheist, even though I'm a deist...

I'm not offended by what he said, I'm just glad he's stringing words together into sentences. ;-)

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Of course, but by presenting certain forms of Christianity and Islam as representative of all religion, it promotes a certain viewpoint. Basically, Christianity and Islam (and their offshoots like the Baha'i cult) tend to be supremacist religions, believing themselves to be superior to all other worldviews. They want to be the representatives and measuring stick of religion. New Atheists, in their ignorance, are basically going along with that.

Pointing it out, which is what New Atheists are doing, isn't going along with it.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Ah - so you were mischaracterizing.

No, I wasn't.