Purchasing One's Atheism Cheaply

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

David Bentley Hart's criticism of atheism is as follows:

What I find chiefly offensive about them is not that they are skeptics or atheists; rather, it is that they are not skeptics at all and have purchased their atheism cheaply

Well, good for him.

Every atheist I know personally, or have been able to question, claims their atheism is a product of their skepticism. I have no reason to doubt them, since they apply the same method that got them to their atheism to other claims.

My atheism is also a product of my overall skepticism.

An example of my skepticism would be, I do not accept any claim that is not supported by demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument. When I apply this method, I get the following results, I do not accept claims of the existence of bigfoot, alien abductions, astrology, the existence of god(s), homeopathy, Loch Ness monster, crystal healing, etc, etc.

The time to start believing a claim is when it is supported by the above criteria, not a second before.

Please point out the problems with that method.

Atheism has lost the weight of intelligence it used to carry. It has become cheap.

Great, you found an article that agrees with your opinions.

Too bad you are both wrong.

He says they are not skeptics at all.

And what he means is that most atheists are the very opposite of the essence of what _xenu_ describes. There is no intellectual burden for the new atheists to carry. No pensivity. They are hardly ever deep in thought, troubled by one aspect of the world or another.

You see a whole new world of atheism when you read the work of Bertrand Russell, or going even farther back, to Friedrich Nietzsche.

What you see in the atheists of old is pain, sweat, tension. Not because they are in a bad situation, but because they wrestle with the reality of atheism head-on. They are vigorous, in every sense of the word. The phrase intellectual virility comes to mind.

Most atheists nowadays call themselves skeptics. But they are not real skeptics. They are not skeptics of their own skepticism. They are not skeptics of atheism, of the beliefs, views and positions they cherish. It doesn't even occur to many people here that skepticism applied consistently involves skepticism of one's own skepticism, and that unless one has a good criteria for their own skepticism.

Skepticism has gone from being a rigorous methodology to a trite label. A self-identifier, along with "vegan", "pro-choice" or "libertarian".

I think that was his point. And I think it will be a difficult one for most atheists here to digest. But I think there's more truth to it than we dare admit.