"Old" atheism, "New"atheism, atheism 3.0, WTF?

[leo-rcc]

After listening to the Boston Atheist podcast where Atheism 3.0 was discussed I looked up some relevant articles on the topic.

Here I found this gem:

The old atheists said there was no God. The so-called "New Atheists" said there was no God, and they were vocally vicious about it. Now, the new "New Atheists" — call it Atheism 3.0 — say there's still no God, but maybe religion isn't all that bad.

First off, what the hell? "Old atheism" was just as vocal against religion as this so called "New atheism". When I read something from Percy Bysshe Shelley, Lord Bacon, or D'Holbach, I see no pussyfooting about religion, they are not saying anything different from a Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris or Guy P. Harrison. So what is this "New atheism" crap? Just because the so called new-atheists have 200 years of better information to base their findings on doesn't mean that the findings of these "old" atheists were any less vitriolic.

Here a quote from Shelley:

All religious nations are founded solely on authority; all the religions of the world forbid examination and do not want one to reason; authority wants one to believe in God; this God is himself founded only on the authority of a few men who pretend to know him, and to come in his name and announce him on earth. A God made by man undoubtedly has need of man to make himself known to man.

http://www.infidels.org/library/historic...heism.html

Tell me that this could not have been written by the likes of Dawkins or Hitchens, all being worded differently.

Then, on to Atheism 3.0.

What a load of crap.

From the USA today article:

Atheists who insist that religion be removed from the public square are doing themselves a disservice, argues Austin Dacey, a former United Nations representative for the staunchly secularist Center for Inquiry and author of The Secular Conscience: Why Belief Belongs in Public Life. A godless public square not only shields religion from public criticism, it also circumvents a broader debate on morality, he argues.

If there is one thing religion does not need it is protection from public criticism. I would even go as far and say that when it comes to criticism, moderates should look a bit more to their own ranks and voice criticism from within their religion, and not rely on us "angry 2.0 atheists" to be confronted with the atrocities the hardcore literalistic fundamentalists undertake in name of the same religion the moderates claim to be in. But if these moderates stay quiet, I sure as shit will not.

If we as atheists would go the route of this so called 3.0 movement, we are just pandering to the religions we do not consider benevolent at all, just because we might offend some religious persons feelings. Well though shit. If you are not able to stand up for what you believe in, there is no reason for us to take your precious beliefs into consideration. Atheism 3.0 is a crock.

Rant over.

[Eilonnwy]

Greg Epstein is an idiot, the problem is that his apparent conciliatory attitude towards religion makes him likable within the atheist and humanist movement. I haven't read his book but Zach said it's terrible, half the time he talks about "how hard it was to write this book." Also, the whole "Good without God" phrase, well Epstein took it from Zach.

Zach can't stand Epstein. :/ I haven't met the guy but I imagine it's only a matter of time before I do given his new found popularity with the atheist community and that he's local to me.

But yeah, I agree with your reaction, it was my reaction too when Zach explained the atheism 3.0 to me. However, Epstein doesn't call it atheism 3.0, the media does. There is some level of the media misrepresenting Epstein, as we discussed in the podcast. Epstein was characterized as praising Rick Warren when that praise was largely taken out of context, however the fact that Epstein had one small positive thing to say about the homophobic prick is completely repugnant to me.

I believe I made the comment in the podcast that this whole conciliatory attitude of atheists towards religion smells more to me of trying to vie for religions special status of non-criticism instead of trying to tear down that misguided special status.

P.S. Leo, Zach says you should write to us with your opinions.

[leo-rcc]

I did not even go into Epstein's lunacy, but yes, as far as I've read up on this book of his I agree with Zach.

[Eilonnwy]

I did not even go into Epstein's lunacy, but yes, as far as I've read up on this book of his I agree with Zach.

Well the whole being conciliatory thing is his idea.

As much as I love the Coalition of Reason's "Good Without God" campaign, it's based on Greg's book and I don't think he deserves the publicity. *sigh*

[Autumnlicious]

Bertrand Russel is as much a "New Atheist" despite him being in the wrong time, making these definitions of "New" and "Old" pretty useless.

[Tiberius]

We need handy new taglines:

Atheism 3.0 - Now with less believing in God!
Atheism 3.0 - Believing in -1 gods since 2010.
Atheism 3.0 - Because simply disagreeing with the claims of theism just doesn't cut it anymore.

[Eilonnwy]

Atheism 3.0 - Because we're pussies and want to get in good with religion

[theVOID]

Atheist religions?

ARE THEY FUCKING MAD!?!


1) I've never ever even understood the difference between 'new atheism' and 'old atheism' aside from some time dependent cultural and linguistic differences - the point is exactly the same, argued with just as much fervour as they are now. It's the same reasoning behind both generations, that being there is no evidence for sky daddy

2) What the fuck is with this Atheism 3.0? Religion isn't bad? Yes it fucking is! It's one of the reasons for my Atheism, getting rid of these dense, vile, brainwashing masses of self asserted authority,superstition and copious bullshit.

[downbeatplumb]

Why do people keep on piling on useless definitions.

I do not believe in God therefore I am an atheist.

Nuff said.

Is there a catholsism 3.0 now washes sins away at a only 30 degrees.

Or Islam 3.0 take two bombs to the subway, I use......

[littlegrimlin1]

I also think this is a load of crap... Why don't we just become Christian Atheists... lol?


naw