The Rise and Fall of the New Atheism: Identity Politics and Tensions Within US Nonbelievers (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.
There is a long history of atrocities committed in the name of religion, likewise there is an equally long committed by atheists. There central trait that it shares, is fundamentalism. Which this report will argue that new atheism is oriented with. The rise of the new atheist movement in the recent years can be argued to be a natural phenomenon of modernity. The emphasis of science and reason as a worldview claimed by the new atheist slogans offer a charming and intriguing worldview to its followers. However, a closer enquiry into the abundance of texts and comparative analysis to the history of ideas, will prove that the ideas advocated by new atheist movement isn’t in any way new nor prevalent to modernity as previous predecessors have been advocating atheist ideals at a much more philosophical level .Closer analysis of new atheism under sociological and philosophical perspectives will be argued in this report to be a revitalization from its previous predecessors. However, unlike its predecessor, the new atheists militancy and disturbingly lack of tolerance towards critiques, but most central, the new atheists claim to the objective truth and knowledge presents a threat to society in which is similar to that of fundamentalist religious movements.
The new atheism: old scientism with a new name
The old scientism comes to us with the same old agenda and slogans, though not without some twists and turns – and with a new name. Not only so, it has also deployed a new army of propagandists and evangelists, equally, if not more, vigorous and desperate to win new converts to its creeds and dogmas from every street corner the world over by every means. No doubt, the new atheism, as it is called today, has been gaining grounds in the lecture halls of some ivory tower academicians of the philosophical materialistic stream as well as the popular media. For which the so-called four horsemen of the anti-theistic apocalypse – Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and the late Christopher Hitchens – must be credited.
Evidence, Theory, and Interpretation: The “New Atheism” and the Philosophy of Science
Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 2013
The term "New Atheism" was coined in 2006 to refer to a clutch of works by writers such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Sam Harris, characterized as much by the aggressiveness of their rhetoric as the substance of their ideas. 1 Although given an enthusiastic welcome on its appearance, particularly in the United States, the passing of time has seen the emergence of more critical and negative attitudes toward the movement, particularly in relation to its philosophical underpinnings. Perhaps the most important development has been the growing recognition of the quasi-religious nature of the movement. 2 As has often been observed, there are uncomfortable parallels between the "New Atheism" and religious fundamentalism-such as the conviction that they are in sole possession of truth; a somewhat disconcerting absence of tolerance for the views of their critics (Dawkins unwisely compared creationists to Holocaust deniers); their simplistic one-dimensional reduction of religion; and their overwhelming sense that they
The so-called new brand of atheism and the postmodern mood of the hour
Unlike the much more sophisticated postmodern thinkers like Jacques Derrida, Michel Focault, Paul de Man and Richard Rorty, the new atheists, led by Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Samuel Harris and Daniel Dennett, appear to be out of touch with 21st century realities. This is most particularly obvious to those who are familiar with the current intellectual and moral crises that the various expressions of the postmodern way of thinking have brought into the field of philosophical inquiry.
The New Atheism (and New Humanism)
A review of the writings of the "four horsemen" of the New Atheism: Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens.
2020
This article questions the reemergence of scientific antireligious activist movements in recent decades. Considering intellectual and political aspects of scientific materialism, Monist and New Atheism movements' programs as well as the historical context of their development, a number of structural similarities is being drawn. Notably, the Darwinian theory of evolution in monistic dysteleological interpretation represents the main rhetoric weapon of atheistic science popularizers against opponents. Also, science is employed as a tool of 'freethought' communities' formation and campaigning for irreligious rights, and against creationism's intellectual expansion. However, if earlier atheistic science popularizers were quite explicit on their world change ambition, contemporaries show no interest in authoring some new science-inspired worldview systems or political projects.