November 18, 2007
bad year for God
It's not been a good year for God. Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion and Christopher Hitchens's God is Not Great have been riding high in the international bestseller lists, while in the US Sam Harris has addressed his Letter to a Christian Nation and Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell has explored the question of how to explain the irrationality of religious belief. Michel Onfray's In Defence of Atheism has added a distinctively French tone to the assault, and AC Grayling's latest collection of elegant English essays is Against All Gods. It's not surprising that cultural commentators have identified a cultural wave, and given it a label: "The New Atheism".
more from Eurozine here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 10:30 AM | Permalink
Comments
I find this constant posting of pro-god and anti-god stuff vey useless and tiresome. the need for "sky hooks" --the term from D. Dennett--is clearly nonsense. If someone chooses to believe in the trinity: Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, God, then ok, just don't try to enlist me or enforce your beliefs upon me. I will go my way and you go yours.
Posted by: fred lapides | Nov 18, 2007 12:18:30 PM
How bad a year has it been?
Richard has sold around 200,000 copies (most of those lying ill-used, if at all, in libraries and reviewers shelves), while during the same period more than 40,000,000 souls have found Christ. He's a rounding error.
Posted by: Carlos | Nov 18, 2007 12:26:49 PM
I am an atheist, and have been for many years. But I'm bored by most articles concerning the subject. I'm over it. It's retreading the same stuff over and over again. I suppose this idea is new to some people but has anyone else come to a wall on this subject?
Posted by: J.M.M. | Nov 18, 2007 8:20:02 PM
J. I too was an atheist for three decades. Most people who are bored with the topic are disinclined to participate in discussions thereof.
Are you looking for something more?
Posted by: Carlos | Nov 18, 2007 10:04:28 PM
That's an odd measure of success for god.
Posted by: God | Nov 18, 2007 11:12:18 PM
I'm just commenting that Atheism is a moot point. The whole matrix of thought is well known to those "in-the-know". It's like reading that you should eat more vegetables.
No duh.
I just don't need to hear anymore.
I think the next commonly held paradigm that needs to be plucked from public acceptance is our modern political paradigms.
I think our great-grandchildren will look back at our political arrangements with horror in the same way we scorn religious attendance today.
Posted by: J.M.M. | Nov 19, 2007 1:32:32 AM
The 3QD folks certainly do like this topic...
Perhaps we need a third way, one that on the one hand doesn't require belief on pain of hell-fire or an all-powerful giver of values, and on the other hand accepts the experience of sacredness wherever it occurs.
Posted by: Sagredo | Nov 19, 2007 10:27:42 PM
I certainly don't claim to have an answer to the god question, but sometimes I find myself leaning towards the things that are truely universal and trying not to become attached to any one view. To me "God" or whatever has to be the same, one reality. Now whether we have any idea of this oneness is another point altogether.
Posted by: michael | Nov 20, 2007 12:26:30 AM
Another brief point. I feel I can live with this ambiguity as to the nature of the infinate. For me religion is a question and not an answer.
Posted by: michael | Nov 20, 2007 12:31:47 AM
A belief in god is a decision to step outside rational thought, so there really is no point in pointing out how ridiculous it is.
Posted by: The Worst of Perth | Nov 20, 2007 1:45:23 AM
Perth, there absolutely is a point in pointing out how ridiculous it is, especially when that step outside of rational thought is unwelcomely pushed upon your laws, children, or any aspect of your life.
Posted by: beajerry | Nov 21, 2007 10:05:52 AM
Post a comment