New Atheists

[naomi24]

Rather a recently coined term, it seems - but what do you understand by it?

[birdie1971]

As Jake and others rightly point out, vocal atheism has been around for a very long time and is clearly not a new phenomenon.

The big difference today though is that we in the UK find ourselves in the very fortunate position of being about to debate, criticise and even deride religion for its many and varied flaws. Other people in this world are not so lucky. There is nothing 'new' about non-belief. The only 'new' thing about it is being able to discuss it openly without the threat of violence and/or social ostracism.

[wildwood]

Rather than an Atheist that has just come out of the closet, I feel it refers more the vocal ones, as others have pointed out.

Like birdie says, it hasn't been all that long since an 'old' Atheist could be put to death for his lack of belief.

[woofgang]

"An erstwhile atheist friend of mine once told me that he had a God-given right to be an atheist."

Yes, by me he is right.

[naomi24]

^^ It's a thought - but that's all it is.

[RATTER15]

>>I suspect the latter - the only difference being that atheists are no longer afraid to speak out.<<

Ditto and with a little more education on the subject and more persuasive maybe.

[naomi24]

Not sure about 'persuasive' Ratter. Even when faced with undeniable evidence, people ignore it and continue to believe what they want to believe. Such is the nature of religious indoctrination.

[RATTER15]

You are right Naomi, I think I meant more likely to be outspoken on the subject in an attempt top get a point across.

[FredPuli43]

Sixty years ago, a known atheist would be an academic, a Bertrand Russell type, and atheism regarded as a harmless eccentricity, the kind of thing would be discussed after dinner at high table, literally of academic interest.
The story was that recruiting sergeants faced with someone who said 'no religion' or the like would enter them as 'C of E', the default position. You were expected to have a religion, even if your adherence was on paper only.
But that has changed. Science has advanced; many of the deepest mysteries of evolution and medicine are mysteries no more; and with it are whole new generations of young people who understand more, question more, and have the evidence to doubt the proclaimed factual truth of religious texts and teaching.
The only 'new' feature of 'new atheists' is that more people are prepared to openly challenge the factual beliefs and tenets of religion. Faith, per se; the idea that there is some deity to whom one can pray for comfort; is harmless and seems itself to be a product of evolution. It is ancient and universal. But once the leaders of a religion claim to direct others because they, the leaders, speak for the deity, the harm is potentially great. That's what atheists, new or old, should be addressing, and do now.

[naomi24]

Good post, Fred.

[mibn2cweus]

'New Atheists' is a veiled connotation used to imply without explicitly stating a subcategory of atheists who are in fact anti-theists, in an attempt to obscure the fact that it was them, theists, who threw the first stone and that anti-theism is simply a response to those whose intent has always been to demonise atheists.

Thanks to the improved understanding of the nature of reality science has provided in recent years, atheists now have something substantial in their arsenal to throw back in the faces of the religious who have for millennia extolled faith as a virtue and sought to marginalise (to state it mildly) non-believers, who now emboldened by the overwhelming indisputability of the facts are at last free to come out of the closet and demand fair treatment . . . if not an apology.

[jomifl]

A good point Mibs, when is the church(RC) going to apologises for (obviously not to) the thousands of people who were tortured, slaughtered, incinerated and enslaved just to glorify a gentle and loving god? Not a breath holding occasion! :-)

[naomi24]

//'New Atheists' is a veiled connotation used to imply without explicitly stating a subcategory of atheists who are in fact anti-theists//

Ditto Jom. Good point mibs.

[NOX]

To me 'New Atheist' conjurs up pretty much the same style of person as 'Reborn Christian' just in the opposite corner.
Where the fundamentally religious are tedious and domineering in their insistance of 'revelation from god', so too are many atheists who rather arrogantly assume that anyone who doesn't share their beliefs is clearly their intellectual inferior. I dislike both types with a passion, niehter have any respect for mankind as a whole or for people's right to free choice without being victimised or ridiculed.

[naomi24]

I have enormous respect for mankind as a whole, and I don’t think any atheist objects to free choice – as long as that choice doesn’t affect anyone else.

[RATTER15]

Nox, I dont know any atheist like you describe, I accept that in discussion, debates and arguments etc things can get a bit heated but isnt that always the case.
I think most Atheists just deplore the so called Christians trying to tell everybody that the Non believers will go to hell and have no morals etc.

[mikey4444]

New Atheists ? Never heard of the term.

Religion isn't difficult you know...treat it like heroin....just say no !