Religion
Related: About this forumWhere Atheism Stops And Religion Begins
Posted: 06/13/2013 2:17 pm
Andrew Schwartz
The New Atheists love proclaiming that religion is dying. It's a claim that is hard to argue with. Religion is certainly on the decline all across the world. The "nones" (i.e. those who hold no religious affiliation) rank as the third most popular religion in the world, trailing Christians and Muslims respectively. Historically, we've never seen anything like this. Atheism was in vogue back in the Enlightenment era but despite all the efforts of Auguste Comte and his peers, it never gained traction. Religion was too imbedded in the culture and was the best answer to all those pesky questions about where we came from and what we are heading towards. Today, atheists are armed with the answers Darwin gave and a modern metaphysics that allows them to confidently argue against religious rhetoric and comfortably say that there is no god.
This is a huge cultural shift and, as many prominent atheist thinkers would suggest, a necessary paradigmatic change in human history. What I find disconcerting, though, are the holes being left in the fabric of society as we see the institution of religion retreating. As an example: when Hurricane Sandy devastated the eastern Seaboard, it was the synagogues, mosques, and churches that served as bases of operation for the Red Cross, #occupySandy, and other aid organizations. Religious communities quickly rallied their members to come out and aid the victims of the storm in a capacity that few other organizations could muster. This is not say that the non-religious did not show up in force to aid those affected by Sandy. Far from it. It was an amazing response across the board yet that response was certainly undergirded by and maintained through the willingness of faith communities to open their doors, their homes, and their lives to those who found themselves without.
Or, let's consider the food bank and soup kitchen systems in America. I live in Harlem and almost every food bank or soup kitchen is run by or through a local mosque, church or synagogue. The faith community provides the physical space, the staffing, and often times the funding. This is not to say that those associated with a faith community are the only ones working at or hosting services for those in need. Again, far from it. What I will say, though, is that faith communities account for a large part of these services and many of our brothers and sisters in life would go with far less in life if it weren't for churches, mosques and synagogues.
These are only two examples and they in themselves are not the point I am trying to make. The examples above embody a larger spirit that I want to lift up, a spirit that is embedded, albeit often lost and forgotten, in the world's religions that compel the faithful to serve and love with abandon. Many of my friends who have transitioned from being religious to being atheists speak of the deep existential peace that it gives them. This is huge and nothing to be argued with. Anyone who has found themselves on the despair side of Sisyphean struggle knows just how sweet it is to find the calm on the other side. But contrary to the hyper-individualistic tropes fed to us by American culture, I would argue that finding the calm is only first step. The second and more important step is feeding that calm, peace, joy, and positivity back into society. Whether that is done through mentoring or activism or lobbying or some other form of praxis is immaterial. The point is to take the good and disseminate it as much as possible.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-schwartz-m-div/where-atheism-stops-and-religion-begins_b_3436710.html
cbayer
(146,218 posts)represent people of different faiths and those who are not believers.
Breaking down the barriers between the various groups can only benefit everyone, imo.
longship
(40,416 posts)Nope. The new atheists do not claim religion is dying. Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins have specifically posited that religion may be a memetic construct, if not a congenital one. And they claim that science may be leaning towards that conclusion but is far from definitive. Both would like more research in this area, Dennett especially so in his book, Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. Christopher Hitchens has expressed the opinion that he could never see religion going away. I am less sure of Sam Harris' opinion on this, but his writing, to me, seems less cogent on many topics.
So right off the bat, this article starts off with a type of false characterization about the so-called new atheism. This is so common that maybe just the use of the term new atheism itself should be a warning flag.
Atheists have been around forever, I suspect. There is only something called new atheism because atheists are no longer burned at the stake or stoned to death these days and are emboldened to speak out in a world which maybe sees those activities as being counter productive.
The only thing new about these new atheists is that they can admit their non-belief without being killed for it. Well, that's a bit of hyperbole on my part, but we still live in a country here where an openly atheistic candidate would have a tough time getting elected -- a kind of modern day burning at the stake, if you would allow me that metaphor.
Dennett's book is so damned good that I have recommended it here before. It is by far the best of the four horsemen books.
The only thing new about this new atheism is that some non-believers are speaking out. Calling them strident, militant, or making up straw men are just common tactics to say that we'd prefer if you just not speak out at all.
I didn't read much past the first sentence because this stuff gets very tiring.
I'd be happy to hear why a person thinks I may be wrong. Maybe I will take the time. But my heart isn't into reading yet another missive on why atheists are wrong about this, that, or the other thing.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)It's too bad, because he makes some good points which are worthy of discussion.
longship
(40,416 posts)There's even those that begin, "I am an atheist, but...". I find those the worst because one really has to twist ones logic around to deliberately offend an ally. And they usually do.
Always nice to see you around, cbayer.
rug always posts interesting stuff, too (even if it gets me going).
Thanks, rug.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)It reinforces my belief that everyone's belief or non-belief is unique and that dogma in either camp is divisive.
Nice to see you as well, longship. I'm just wrapping up a very long road trip and look forward to getting back to my usual routine.
I agree that rug posts some interesting things and have seen much good debate as a result.
edhopper
(33,650 posts)I wish we lived in a country that did not need soup kitchens and the largess of institutions to stop people from going hungry.
I wish we provided the basic needs of all our citizens and didn't do everything possible for the wealthiest, while doing the least effort for those at the low end of society.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)dimbear
(6,271 posts)I went through the first several decades of my life without encountering the phenomenon--used to just get food. Spreading, too. Going to take the place of the collection plate in all probability.
Well, that's solved.
rug
(82,333 posts)dimbear
(6,271 posts)The checkout charities are usually medical research or the like. Another peculiarity is that the clerks announce (and thank you for) over the PA any particularly large donation.
Bizarre.