Meliorism - The rise of neo-atheism and the fall of reason

[EGross]

This has been an interesting thread.

Unlike being part of a religion, where there is leadership, authority figures, and heirarchy, atheism is devoid of all of those trimmings. And so, by taking on that interesting label, one distances from a system of controls and edicts and falls into a world where one needs to make personal choices.

The current most vocal speakers, authors, and media personalities really do not speak for a "movement", because just because one stops believing in a God does not mean that he or she is now part of a new group anymore than one who stops drinking is part of a group that shouts that drinking is bad.

While I do respect Richard Dawkins, what he has contributed, and so forth, I do cringe when I hear him attempt to debate. His forte is science, and I have enjoyed his "Nature of Reality" book. Sam Harris is great at philosophy and injecting humor, but his forte is not religion, and he often errs when speaking of Christian and Jewish theology during debates, which is sometimes embarassing. (I know almost nothing of Islam, so I cannot comment there). Even so, I do like his style, although I would not call him my leader. And that goes for the others who are quite vocal as well.

Unless I am mistaken (and forgive me if I am), MM has taken issue with those athiests who have a need for structure, seek leadership, and would subscribe to dogma as defined by the handful of popular personalities. Just notice the reaction when MM says that he didn't care for the writings of Dawkins. The reaction was almost akin to me telling my neighbor that the Rambam speaks in circles and his reasoning is contrived! How dare I speak thusly about a defacto leader.

Compare the Tea Party to Occupy Wallstreet. TP is a religious based ideological group. OWS had no real leadership, everyone had his or her own agenda, and there was no single message. I would suggest that a TP format would probably be seductive, but it is not a direction that I would be comfortable with, anymore than I am comfortable with Sam Harris using terms like "mystical" and "spiritual" in a worldview that is very metaphysical.

I am not into being a joiner. Nor am I interested in an atheist bible, dogma, or being branded as part of a movement. The "Amazing Atheist" does not speak for me. And I would hope that all of us would speak for ourselves.