religious panic and the rise of the atheist menace
Just in case you haven’t noticed by the brisk sales of books about atheism, skepticism and science, or by the crowds that swarm to hear Richard Dawkins’ lectures, or by the fact that some of the biggest blogs on the web are ran by atheists and agnostics for their fellow non-theists, atheism is getting big. Really big. It’s not as big as Jesus though, since some three quarters of the U.S. population still calls itself Christian, but according to a new poll, as many as 15% of Americans say they don’t follow any religious tradition. And that number has been projected to grow over the next few decades to one in four. However, before cheering for the explosion of atheism across the nation, keep in mind that the study also added deists and disenfranchised theists into the mix. Only 42% of the studied group are actually atheists or agnostics who highly doubt theistic premises.
But atheism is growing and it’s racking up demographic clout big enough to turn heads, but why? What made so many people leave religious traditions and embrace constant doubt and questioning of the universe they inhabit? The simplest reason I can think of is that we’re outgrowing today’s religious dogmas which failed to account for important scientific discoveries when they were new, much less our current body of knowledge. I don’t want to flatter us too much, but in the last few hundred years we’ve done a pretty damn good job when it comes to exploring nature for a bunch of upright apes with fancy brain wiring. However, as we kept on learning and updating our libraries and textbooks, our religious traditions have been pretty much frozen in place.
What theistic holy books try to tell us about our world tends to be wrong and at odds with observable, verifiable facts. Outside of a very closed environment in which information is censored to either strictly adhere to dogma or mutilated to fit preconceived notions, today’s religious traditions are failing to provide plausible answers to our existential questions. Even haughty, esoteric theology rooted in the deism of the Enlightenment tends to trip and fall flat on its face when confronted with serious questions about good, evil and the nature of deities, which is to be expected because by definition, theologians try to explain something that has no real definition and should fall outside our realm of perception. Put a blind person in a room and try to have her explain what sound the color blue makes. This is pretty much what theologians try to do when expounding on gods.
By not involving the supernatural and sticking to only what we can verify through experiments and observation, scientists greatly simplify matters and can come up with perfectly logical explanations. Hence, it makes more sense for people to trust the scientific method rather than lengthy pontifications involving fuzzy paradoxes and a whole lot of hemming and hawing from theologians and priests. For obvious reasons, ardent theists don’t like this one bit, which is why like all reports about the growing atheist menace on the horizon, the reporting of the poll referenced in the introduction came filled with all sorts of nasty comments intended to placate them…
While the numbers portend a dramatic change for the American religious scene — “religious nones” accounted for just 8 percent of the population in 1990 — the United States is not poised adopt the anti-religious posture of much of secularized Europe.
Europe is anti-religious? Really? Since when? Sure, it’s far more secular than the United States where every politician rushes to waive the Bible at election time, but we hardly see cathedrals getting vandalized or closed down, the Vatican being disbanded, or priests constantly harassed by rowing squads of atheist hecklers. The talking point about Europe being institutionally hostile to religious organizations is a smear, created by those who only seem capable of a with-us-or-against-us mentality. To affirm their beliefs, they insist to rationalizing that those who disagree have an evil agenda to dismantle their faith, an attitude embodied in this quote…
American religious nones tend to be religious skeptics as opposed to outright atheists. Fewer than ten percent of those identifying with no religious tradition call themselves atheists or hold atheistic beliefs, according to the new study.
Right. Atheists aren’t religious skeptics who decided that based on the available evidence there are no deities, they’re just rabid, evil anti-religious people like those snooty Europeans. We get the point. And that point is still nonsense. If you take a look at page 11 of the study itself, you’ll see where that sub 10% atheist rate appears. In a question about what the respondents think about the existence of God, responses questioning whether you could really know if a deity exists were grouped into different categories which made up 35% of all replies. While it’s a difference of opinion and wording that separates agnosticism from atheism, agnostics actually do hold many atheist beliefs. To them, God is not personal, tangible or demonstrably provable. They don’t go to church, they doubt the existence of the afterlife, they accept evolution and cosmology. They’re just not willing to completely shut the book on the idea of a deity and call it a day quite yet.
To present atheists as nothing more than God denialists is intellectually lazy and offensive. It sounds like Ray Comfort’s dialogues with Kirk Cameron before the two head off to stare at a banana in slack-jawed awe and worship it as the embodiment of God’s omnipotence. Let’s give those who are skeptical of blind faith their due because they’re trying to take charge of their lives and find logical answers to questions with which we all have to struggle. This is why they’re rejecting dogma and taking up science books. They’re intellectual explorers. To marginalize them for the benefit of those who erupt into hysterics the minute they see anything positive about atheists is just malicious and arrogantly condescending.
Kinda makes one wonder why the religious right is so frightened of the atheists. Are they feeling the same pressure which Christianity placed upon the worship of Mars and Apollo? Perhaps we are seeing the next step in human spiritual evolution: from many gods, to one god, to no gods. Sounds like a positive step to me.
Or do you think it might be as simple as people no longer blindly following the dogma of organized religion because of the scandals and intransigence of the pope to liberalize his stand on sex. Science gave us the “Pill” and changed the world forever. I think it is that people use science to reinforce their belief system and to not feel regret for abandoning the religious principles that their parents believed in.
It is the hypocrisy of the religious hard liners that is driving people away from organized religion, not the enlightenment of the masses by science.
Your irony veers into the same intolerance seen in religious discourse…is your ultimate aim the destruction of religion, “heckling” of priests? Damn, dude, I am an atheist and if people want their religion that’s fine, its a free country, “keep it out of the public sphere” is what we should be saying…
You also rank agnostics below atheists, so you’re not just picking on the fundy rubes…
Finally, do you really believe that only logically pure, computative thinking explains the process of scientific discovery?
“…is your ultimate aim the destruction of religion, ‘heckling’ of priests?”
I’m not sure what post you read but it’s definitely not the one above. Heckling priests or trying to destroy religion are charges made by fundamentalists against European non-theists. The post simply gives these as examples of what’s not happening in Europe and says that calling atheists or other non-theists “anti-religious” is wrong.
There’s not a single line that even advocates atheism, only a paragraph about not trying to paint non-theists as evil, anti-religious God denialists because it’s simplistic and petty to do so. Ditto for any encouragement to dismantle religious institutions or the ridicule of people’s religious beliefs. It’s just not there.
“You also rank agnostics below atheists…”
There was a ranking in the post? Really? I was just pointing out the commonalities and differences between atheists and agnostics to show that the quoted statement about how few people supposedly hold atheistic beliefs and ideas was wrong.
Like I said, I don’t know what post you read but it certainly doesn’t seem like the one to which you’re replying…
I assumed you would attempt the “what post we’re you reading???” bait and switch, so I didn’t lay my evidence down in the first post. I will do so now.
You say:
“Europe is anti-religious? Really? Since when? Sure, it’s far more secular than the United States where every politician rushes to waive the Bible at election time, but we hardly see cathedrals getting vandalized or closed down, the Vatican being disbanded, or priests constantly harassed by rowing squads of atheist hecklers.”
The only evidence I need that Europe is “anti-religious” is that when polled, much greater than 50% of respondents claim no religion, agnosticism, or atheism (we are talking Western and Northern Europe here). In places like Finland, a full 90% claim atheism. But this is apparently not enough evidence for you. You need to see vandalism, disbanding, harrassment. Note that I merely said your irony got away from you, I don’t think you actually believe this (but someone not as wiley in the ways of snark would not see this, especially our religious brethren)
As to agnosticism, you say: “They’re just not willing to completely shut the book on the idea of a deity and call it a day quite yet.” Well, that’s how a committed atheist would see it, but a sophisticated agnostic is making absolutely no claim about a deity whatsoever, they are making a claim about epistemology, and they are slightly more humble about the reach of human rationality than the rabid atheists. Wiki “Pyrrhonic Skepticism.”
I will admit that my final charge, “do you really believe that only logically pure, computative thinking explains the process of scientific discovery?” is not directly related to this particular post. But it is one of my biggest hang-ups with virulent atheists, and you seemed to be heading in that direction.
The dude at Cosmic Variance is a case in point. He dismissed ESP or some such thing because it cannot be explained using the four fundamental forces of physics. Then he went on to say if a phenomenon doesn’t fit into the four fundamental forces of physics, it must be a hoax or illusion. Now Victorian physicists took the same stance against that crazy black-box radiation Planck was a-discoverin’. Structure of Scientific Revolutions and all that….
And, oh, saw this on Kurtzweil, probably we should be glad he’s only getting written up on web versions of old mainstream outlets like this, but it gets linked to by other sites, and so on.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6217676/Immortality-only-20-years-away-says-scientist.html
Bravo for taking on these folks, they are hucksters!
Solar Hero said: “The only evidence I need that Europe is “anti-religious” is that when polled, much greater than 50% of respondents claim no religion, agnosticism, or atheism (we are talking Western and Northern Europe here). In places like Finland, a full 90% claim atheism. But this is apparently not enough evidence for you. You need to see vandalism, disbanding, harrassment.”
Being non-religious, whether atheist, agnostic, or simply declaring no religion, does not make someone “anti-religious”. It makes them NON-religious. That’s all. Certainly there can be some atheists who are anti-religious. But you are implying that all atheists are.
True, most atheists, and many agnostics, are against religion forcing themselves into public schools and politics. But again, that’s not anti-religion, that’s promoting separation of religion and government. A noble goal, I should think. Unless you think a religious dictatorship is good for people.
But there are all those mosques and synagogues that get vandalized. But I think you will find that in the vast majority of those incidents, it isn’t atheists who are responsible, but Christians. Most atheists that I know are willing to tolerate a theist’s personal beliefs, as long as he keeps it PERSONAL, and doesn’t try to force it upon impressionable children.
So. where does one go in the united states, to find more than 2 other people who aren’t religious NUTS.
ESPECIALLY a female companion. It’s getting lonely in the midwest, and life is not fun.
“I assumed you would attempt the … bait and switch, so I didn’t lay my evidence down in the first post. I will do so now.”
No strategy for debate will ever make an incorrect assertion suddenly true. And think about this. Could it be that I really was confused from where you were getting your objections rather than try to “bait and switch” you?
“The only evidence I need that Europe is “anti-religious” is that when polled, much greater than 50% of respondents claim no religion, agnosticism, or atheism…”
That’s not at all evidence of anti-religious attitudes. For a self-identified atheist, you sure seem to take a hard stance against people like yourself. I’m not a follower of Wicca. Does this mean that I’m anti-Wiccan? Of course not. It just means that I don’t ascribe to Wiccan tenants and am not a follower of the religion.
By the way, a link to one of those polls would be terrific.
“You need to see vandalism, disbanding, harrassment.”
Oh sweet FSM no! I would be appalled if I saw something like that. However, that would be anti-religious behavior. Not believing in something doesn’t make you an antagonist to the idea. However, actively lashing out against the beliefs in question, would. I’m not a Christian, but I’ve never tried to discourage my Christian friends from their beliefs or tell them not to go to church. How would that make me anti-religious?
“Well, that’s how a committed atheist would see it, but a sophisticated agnostic is making absolutely no claim about a deity whatsoever…”
It seems like you’re reading too much into one phrase. I’m talking about agnostics and comparing where they and atheists differ. Nowhere is there supposed to be any sort of implication that one view is better than another, just that they share a lot of common ground in contradiction to religious commentators’ claims.
“… do you really believe that only logically pure, computative thinking explains the process of scientific discovery?”
No. Scientists are often driven by emotion and enthusiasm which leads them to spend years trying to learn something that fascinates them. Humans don’t think like they were pre-programmed robots, in pure logical and computational constraints. If we did, we wouldn’t be who we are today.
If I’d been given the opportunity, I would have been one of those answering in the “exceptionally skeptical, but not totally certain” cateory.
Having watched both my father and my brother come to intense, overwhelming, life altering religious “belief” (read: desperation) late in life, I have earned my doubts. Sitting between them in the living room on visits to my father, listening to their entreaties – from competing beliefs systems – and being whipped back and forth like the head of a tennis patron, while each explains to the other and to me and to themselves most of all why the book, pamphlet, magazine, video in their hand is the Truth…..breathe…..I know I cannot accept religious belief itself.
But what of the wonder I feel at everything around me? I see no inconsistency in scientific discovery and a belief, more like a hope, that somehow all this was planned. It all fits so perfectly. I do not worship the mystery – and I welcome the explanation. Yet each marvel exposed, each explanation of the interconnectedness of all life, and all existence, makes me wonder…and think about something I wish I knew, really knew, more about. God? No. Human driven belief systems to explain ourselves? No. Scientists as the “peelers in chief” of the onion left for us to discover? Maybe.
But what about the wonder that I feel of the aliens above me? I see no inconsistency in scientific discovery and a belief in alien contact, more like a hope, that somehow alien visits are all planned. It all fits so perfectly. I do not worship the mystery of alien contact – and I welcome the explanation. Yet each marvel exposed, each explanation of the interconnectedness of all life, and all existence, makes me wonder…and think about something I wish I knew, really knew, more about. Aliens
(Holds up SARCASM sign)
Dear Jypson: Apparently someone hasn’t been entirely paper trained. But, nevertheless, you seem like a good dog. That you took the time (whole minutes, apparently) to craft your gently sarcastic comment is a compliment. As much as you will find it distasteful to think about, I found your effort sweet and very funny. Extra kibble for you! *pat* *pat*
Oh, and I’m glad you’re interested in aliens. We need all the help we can get from you earthlings.