The New Atheism

"I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs." --- Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation

"Atheists to me fall in the same category as lawyers ... people hate them in general, but they like their own."

Pete (in process of adding some footnotes):

Many, probably most, of us at argument nights are atheists (although some may prefer descriptions such as "agnostic"). With the decline of the Cold War, it would certainly seem that the greatest danger of human violence in the U.S. and most the world (exempting Africa) now derives from religious extremism. And it seems to me as virtually inevitable that this focus of the danger will only increase in the future. The danger is currently primarily Muslim extremism, but certainly also includes evangelical Christian bombers, extremists Zionists, white-power religions, and could arguably be extended to God's directives to George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq (and not waver in the face of your premises being falsified).

But atheists are a tiny fraction of the U.S. and world populace¹, disdained by the majority of Americans², . Is it constructive for them to criticize religion and superstition at this point? Is Dawkins correct to engage the larger battle (rationalism v. supernaturalism)? Or are his (scientist) critics correct that this will only harm rationality as he helps to link science (especially evolution) to atheism in a highly theistic world? Even if progress were possible, would not progress against belief in supernatural beings in the west only exacerbate the disdain, fear, and hatred from the extremist Muslim world? How much should such practical considerations affect our promotion of concept of rationality?

Further, Dawkins says "Most highly intelligent people are atheists."³ Is that true, and if so, who are the "most highly intelligent people"? I've long assumed it is *not* true -- with the exception of professional scientists and some academic fields⁴, -- mostly because I have assumed that if it were true that I would have heard about some compelling studies from people like Dawkins. But Dennett points out that studying religion empircally, despite some excellent exceptions, has generally been forbidden. Most of the best scientists are atheists⁵. Most good comedians are atheists. Most of the smartest programmers I've worked with are atheists. Most of the most successful leaders in IT are atheists⁷. The top few wealthiest persons in the world are atheists⁸. I'm starting to change my mind -- as long as I haven't seen any really good surveys/studies of intelligence/religious belief in the general population, I have to lean toward Dawkins being right.

Finally, most of the pop music artists I like most -- insofar as I've ever been able to deduce it -- are atheists. And the "Tools Team" at FourGen, which had most the smartest programmers there, was overwhelmingly atheist. The OneName development team (which admitedly had many of those same people) was majority atheist. The HeRMES team was majority atheists. The WaMu Online Security Team I am currently on is 3/4 atheists. I don't care a whit about someone's religious beliefs when I join or recruit team members or when I hear pop music. So why should such a tiny, tiny minority of the population -- yes, even in Seattle -- form such a consistent majority of my co-workers and musical tastes?

 Create your own free wiki!HelpPublic, not yet premium Privacy Policy RSS