Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (1):1-13 (2011)
|Abstract||Militant modern atheism, whose most eloquent champion is Richard Dawkins, provides an effective and necessary critique of fundamentalist forms of religion and their role in political life, both within states and across national boundaries. Because it is also presented as a more general attack on religion (tout court), it has provoked a severe reaction from scholars who regard its conception of religion as shallow and narrow. My aim is to examine this debate, identifying insights and oversights on both sides.Two distinct conceptions of religion are in play. For Dawkins and his allies (most notably Dan Dennett) religions are grounded in doctrines, propositions about supernatural entities, events and processes which the devout believe. Their beliefs prompt them to actions, which they support or rationalize by reference to the doctrines. Dawkins and Dennett view the acceptance of the doctrines as resting on cognitive misfiring — these are delusions to be outgrown or spells to be broken.By contrast, the religious scholars who criticize the militant atheists often view religion as centered in social practices that inform and enrich human lives. To the extent that there are doctrines that atheists might subject to epistemic evaluation, these are to be viewed as pieces of scaffolding, that are, in principle, dispensable.I argue that militant modern atheism is incomplete (and likely counter-productive) so long as it fails to attend systematically to the roles religion fulfills in human lives. Yet it is important to achieve public clarity about the literal falsehood of the doctrines on which fundamentalists rely. The challenge is to develop a well-articulated and convincing version of secular humanism. Meeting that challenge is, I claim, one of the central problems of philosophy today|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andrew Fiala (2009). Militant Atheism, Pragmatism, and the God-Shaped Hole. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 65 (3):139 - 151.
Andrew Johnson (2013). An Apology for the “New Atheism”. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 73 (1):5-28.
Ian James Kidd (forthcoming). Epistemic Vices in Public Debate: The Case of New Atheism. In Christopher Cotter & Philip Quadrio (eds.), New Atheism's Legacy: Critical Perspectives from Philosophy and the Social Sciences. Springer.
J. Thomas Howe (2012). Affirmations After God: Friedrich Nietzsche and Richard Dawkins on Atheism. Zygon 47 (1):140-155.
Robin Le Poidevin (1996). Arguing for Atheism: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion. Routledge.
Ulf Zackariasson (2009). A Critique of Foundationalist Conceptions of Comprehensive Doctrines in the Religion in Politics-Debate. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 65 (1):11 - 28.
J. Angelo Corlett (2009). Dawkins' God Less Delusion. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 65 (3):125 - 138.
Richard Jonathan Sagar, The Cognitive Science of Religion/Atheism and its Impact on Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology.
Jolyon Charles Leslie Agar (2012). Raging Against God: Examining the Radical Secularism and Humanism of 'New Atheism'. Journal of Critical Realism 11 (2):225-246.
Michael Martin (ed.) (2007). The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vincent Brümmer (2010). Dawkins' Religion. Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 52 (2).
Added to index2010-10-06
Total downloads268 ( #615 of 549,064 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,099 of 549,064 )
How can I increase my downloads?