Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (1):1-13 (2011)

Authors
Philip Kitcher
Columbia University
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)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2010.00500.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,078
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Problems of Religious Luck: Assessing the Limits of Reasonable Religious Disagreement.Guy Axtell - 2019 - Lanham, MD, USA & London, UK: Lexington Books/Rowman & Littlefield.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Militant Atheism, Pragmatism, and the God-Shaped Hole.Andrew Fiala - 2008 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 65 (3):139 - 151.
An Apology for the “New Atheism”.Andrew Johnson - 2013 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 73 (1):5-28.
Dawkins' God Less Delusion.J. Angelo Corlett - 2009 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 65 (3):125 - 138.
Atheism: A Very Short Introduction.Julian Baggini - 2003 - Oxford University Press.
Dawkins' Religion.Vincent Brümmer - 2010 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 52 (2):177-192.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-10-06

Total views
334 ( #30,493 of 2,498,795 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #421,542 of 2,498,795 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes