Metaphilosophical Reflections on Theism and Atheism in the Current Debate (original) (raw)
Related papers
Review: Religion and the new atheism: A critical appraisal
This edited volume of essays will provide an extremely useful, critical companion to the writings of the four horsemen of the new atheism, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens. The remarkable interest in the writings and pronouncements of these new atheists certainly requires interrogation, and the essays in this excellent book offer a range of perspectives for reflecting on, among other things, the substance of the new atheist critique of religion, the links between atheism and science, sociological explanations for the sudden and unexpected surge of interest in atheism, theological engagements with secular critiques and the epistemological links between the new atheism and religious fundamentalism. Ably put together by the editor Amarnath Amarasingam with the support of Warren Goldstein, series editor for Studies in Critical Research on Religion for Brill, I expect this volume to become essential reading for scholars and students, whether from theological, philosophical, sociological or religious studies disciplinary backgrounds. In what follows, I will outline the contents of the book before selecting, perhaps arbitrarily, two of the essays for more sustained reflection.
Atheism in The Universal Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Studia Gilsoniana, 2018
The author considers the problem of atheism. She discusses the history of atheism, forms of atheism, and the causes and motives of atheism. She concludes that (a) the history of the negation of God indirectly confirms the endurance of the idea of God and the affirmation of God throughout time; although there are various forms of the negation of God, the idea of God persists, for there is no ultimate negation that could resolve this question once and for all; (b) an erroneous conception of God could be a motivation for seeking a better understanding and expression of the truth about God in a more suitable and more easily understood language; (c) systems that presuppose absolute atheism (like those of Marx, Nietzsche, Sartre) show that with the negation of God all other values collapse and are supplanted by relativism and, ultimately, nihilism; (d) the myth of the “deified” man has not been verified in practical Marxism nor in the “supermanhood” of certain nations; the various absolutes that man has established—Man, Humanity, Nature, Science, History—are not sufficient, and ultimately along with the “death of God” they lead to the “death of man.”
It would be fair to say that in recent times there has been a growth in the acceptance of the so-called New Atheism as professed by such eminent scientists as Richard Dawkins and others. What is different about New Atheism, as compared to (Old) Atheism, is that not only do its followers profess a disbelief in a theistic reality, but they actively encourage an opposition to theism, most often accompanied by a “pugnacity towards religion”, using their own understanding of what theism – and faith – is and is not. Dawkins observes that “one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.” This is what, for Dawkins and others of his persuasion, faith entails – a suspension of understanding (this despite Theology’s oft acknowledged task of being fides quaerens intellectum). This essay will attempt to define what the inconsistencies and similarities are between Religion, specifically the Catholic Christian religion, and New Atheism. It will specifically try to demonstrate the similarities to being a ‘believing atheist’ with that of a ‘believing Christian’ so as to highlight the inconsistency within the New Atheist’s position.
An empirical analysis of the correlation between philosophical perspectives and atheism
NIZAR SMIDA, 2024
Our main objective in this research is to affirm that philosophy, in its true essence and depth, has never been inherently opposed to religion. Rather, the turn toward atheism within philosophy represents isolated, personal stances, often reactionary in nature, and not rooted in genuine intellectual reflection, which the Qur’an encourages and calls people to adhere to. Our endeavor is to show that the call to atheism is foreign to reason, understood as a sound faculty or a sense linked to the pursuit of truth, as previously demonstrated by Descartes in his focus on the principles and methods of philosophical inquiry. To facilitate the achievement of these goals, we have employed several methodologies, primarily the structural method, which helps us analyze selected texts, this methodology enables the understanding of the elements within the studied positions, the relationships that link them, and the underlying implications upon which they are based. We will apply this method practically when analyzing conceptions that reject religion, uncovering the framework underpinning each conception. This approach facilitates comprehension by examining the rational foundations that support each interpretation of religion and later pave the way for its denial or transcendence. the historical method, which allows us to trace the development and dissemination of atheism, this approach is based on the premise that every sensory or intellectual phenomenon has an origin defined by time and place, evolving through transformations and additions over time. By employing this method, we can trace the development of various interpretations of religion and understand the intellectual accumulations shaped by successive historical periods, and the deconstructionist method, through which we identify the contradictions and flawed principles underlying atheistic arguments, this method allows for in-depth critique of the foundations, developmental trajectories, and final outcomes of phenomena. It also provides a means to establish new perspectives—whether by modifying the existing model, recontextualizing it, or replacing it with an entirely new framework. The importance of re-examining the relationship between philosophy and atheism stems from the profound influence of certain philosophical positions and their negative views on religion within various atheistic currents, especially contemporary ones. Contemporary atheism today poses a threat to religion as a symbolic human system, rich in a value-laden framework that upholds the essence of humanity in an era dominated by materialism and the absence of values. The central question of this research is: Can the human being truly achieve existence independently? Or can one live in this world isolated from all influential forces, including the creative and divine force? Keywords: atheism; philosophy; reason; humanity; faith; truth
The Varieties and Revisions of Atheism
Zygon�, 2005
The philosopher Antony Flew has argued for decades that theistic arguments cannot meet criteria of truth. In this essay I respond to Flew's recent announcement that research into the emergence of DNA provides grounds for rational belief in an intelligent orderer, a "God." Flew's theistic turn is important for philosophers of religion and the wider science-and-religion dialogue. It becomes apparent, however, that Flew's "conversion" is not as decisive as one might imagine. While he admits growth in scientific and philosophical understanding, he rejects the idea of growth in religious understanding. Further, he endorses a version of "theoretical theism" while denying the practical importance of belief. Such denial of practical conviction is part of a modernist mindset that separates freedom from the embeddedness of human beings in the natural world. I conclude by noting that the entanglement of human action and wider physical processes, an entanglement seen emblematically in the environmental crisis, requires not only considering the importance of intelligence and order in the emergence of life but also the significance of human agency in claims about the divine and the natural world.
Varieties of Unbelief: A Taxonomy of Atheistic Positions
In this article, we offer an overview of different version of contemporary atheism from the viewpoint of positive beliefs that are joined together with atheistic worldview. Our four main classes of atheism are scientistic atheism, philosophical atheism, tragic atheism and humanistic atheism, which can then be divided to various subclasses. With this classification, we aim to challenge the view according to which atheism is not a belief system but merely a lack of belief in some transcendent being. Moreover, there seems to be no atheism per se, but it always appears with some positive beliefs.