- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What does the board think of the *New Atheist* movement?
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:01 pm
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:01 pm
quote:
New Atheism is the journalistic term used to describe the positions promoted by atheists of the twenty-first century. This modern-day atheism and secularism is advanced by critics of religion and religious belief,[1] a group of modern atheist thinkers and writers who advocate the view that superstition, religion and irrationalism should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises in government, education and politics.[2]
quote:
On September 30, 2007 four prominent atheists (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett) met at Hitchens' residence for a private two-hour unmoderated discussion. The event was videotaped and titled "The Four Horsemen".[9] During "The God Debate" in 2010 featuring Christopher Hitchens vs Dinesh D'Souza the men were collectively referred to as the "Four Horsemen of the Non-Apocalypse",[10] an allusion to the biblical Four Horsemen from the Book of Revelation.[11]
quote:
Glenn Greenwald,[66][67] Toronto-based journalist and Mideast commentator Murtaza Hussain,[66][67] Salon columnist Nathan Lean,[67] scholars Wade Jacoby and Hakan Yavuz,[68] and historian of religion William Emilsen[69] have accused the New Atheist movement of Islamophobia. Wade Jacoby and Hakan Yavuz assert that "a group of 'new atheists' such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens" have "invoked Samuel Huntington's 'clash of civilizations' theory to explain the current political contestation" and that this forms part of a trend toward "Islamophobia [...] in the study of Muslim societies".[68] William W. Emilson argues that "the 'new' in the new atheists' writings is not their aggressiveness, nor their extraordinary popularity, nor even their scientific approach to religion, rather it is their attack not only on militant Islamism but also on Islam itself under the cloak of its general critique of religion".[69] Murtaza Hussain has alleged that leading figures in the New Atheist movement "have stepped in to give a veneer of scientific respectability to today's politically useful bigotry".[66][70]
New Atheism (NA) is starting to be put in the same arena as the gasp Alt Right gasp by some leftists. Just do a twitter search of "New atheist" LINK. look at the top, someone wrote a book about its "threat" to something or another.
Here is a funny twitter thread between Sam Harris and Glenn Greenwald LINK. It's worth a look.
The regressive left's NA narrative seems to be that it promotes racism (shocker) and justifying imperialism/western superiority. Being that the poliboard is mostly Southern Christians, I'm curious to see what the board thinks of this politically incorrect, unapologetically anti-Islam movement.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:02 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Tell 'em to go to hell
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:04 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Fedora wearing omega males
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:05 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Sounds like more "HEY EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME!" bullshite from people who are just as insecure as the individuals they pride themselves in making fun of.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:05 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
New Atheism is the same as old Atheism. They are just more bold in harassing those with religious convictions as 1st world countries become more secularized.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:09 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:
During "The God Debate" in 2010 featuring Christopher Hitchens vs Dinesh D'Souza
Didn't D'Souza own him? It's been a while since that happened, can't remember.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:10 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Pure atheists like these guys are the inverse of the fundamentalists.
I don't get how you can get 100% behind the belief that there is no higher order or God-like entity.
I wish "new atheism" would turn into agnosticism.
I don't get how you can get 100% behind the belief that there is no higher order or God-like entity.
I wish "new atheism" would turn into agnosticism.
This post was edited on 11/30/16 at 11:11 pm
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:11 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
I hate it but unfortunately a lot of OT posters are of the militant new atheist breed
I posted a pic of some asshat standing across the street on a Sunday from a church here in Seattle holding a sign saying "GOD ISN'T REAL" and most of the OT not only defended him but praised him
I posted a pic of some asshat standing across the street on a Sunday from a church here in Seattle holding a sign saying "GOD ISN'T REAL" and most of the OT not only defended him but praised him
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:11 pm to FooManChoo
I'm a little suspicious of anyone who claims to know The Answers.
This post was edited on 11/30/16 at 11:12 pm
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:11 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Sam Harris is a pretty polite and rational debater. If anyone on the board were to listen to these 4 I'd suggest him. He doesn't shout or interrupt. He seems to live his life with good morals and a family man.
Hitchens was almost unbeatable in debates but was so pompous and, well too smart for his own good, that people just hated him with every fiber.
Dawkins is my least favorite debater.
Don't know much about dennet.
Everyone on here will think they're all gonna burn in hell by a man in red tights.
Hitchens was almost unbeatable in debates but was so pompous and, well too smart for his own good, that people just hated him with every fiber.
Dawkins is my least favorite debater.
Don't know much about dennet.
Everyone on here will think they're all gonna burn in hell by a man in red tights.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:13 pm to TiptonInSC
quote:
Didn't D'Souza own him?
No. But it wasn't a secure hitchens take down so I think people see it as their side won. Both did great and I don't think there was a clear winner but if you start out watching hoping hitchens fails then you'll think he does.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:14 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Really not a fan of Dawkins, but I love Harris and Hitchens. Not all that familiar with Dennett.
It's a fricking tragedy Hitchens wasn't alive to see this election. I honestly think if Hitchens were alive, Bernie would have been the Democratic nominee. Would have been entertaining as hell to see him go after Trump and Hillary this election.
It's a fricking tragedy Hitchens wasn't alive to see this election. I honestly think if Hitchens were alive, Bernie would have been the Democratic nominee. Would have been entertaining as hell to see him go after Trump and Hillary this election.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:14 pm to goldennugget
quote:oh, that word again
militant
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:15 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:One can't be critical of organized religion (note different than critical of a belief in God), then not be critical of the Islamic religion.
I'm curious to see what the board thinks of this politically incorrect, unapologetically anti-Islam movement.
To me, one of the most annoying thing one can do, is to present a position as principled, then hypocritically change the position when it's inconvenient.
It's one thing to be self-admitted hypocrite, it's another to be hypocrite in denial.
The consistency of Sam Harris and others should be acknowledged, when if one disagrees with their principles.
This post was edited on 11/30/16 at 11:16 pm
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:16 pm to goldennugget
and your religion is?
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:16 pm to TiptonInSC
quote:
Didn't D'Souza own him? It's been a while since that happened, can't remember.
I haven't seen it, but Hitchens is the greatest debater I've ever seen. If Dinesh beat him, that's a hell of an accomplishment. I doubt Hitchens could count the number of times he's lost a debate since he turned 40 on one hand.
This post was edited on 11/30/16 at 11:18 pm
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:16 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:Trollinganity
and your religion is?
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:16 pm to OMLandshark
I dunno hitchens was VERY familiar with the ins and outs of our military and overseas tinkering. He very well may have hated Hillary so much for her disservice to the military that he didn't vote for her. I highly doubt he'd ever pull the trigger for Donald though.
Posted on 11/30/16 at 11:17 pm to goldennugget
quote:
I posted a pic of some asshat standing across the street on a Sunday from a church here in Seattle holding a sign saying "GOD ISN'T REAL" and most of the OT not only defended him but praised him
People like that would shite their pants in a religious less world. Religion keeps lots of low IQ people in line who wouldn't adhere to civilized society without its rules and structure.
This post was edited on 11/30/16 at 11:18 pm
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News