Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
PHILOSOPHY: THEME 1 - CHALLENGES TO RELIGIOUS BELIEF (NEW ATHEISM) -…
PHILOSOPHY: THEME 1 - CHALLENGES TO RELIGIOUS BELIEF (NEW ATHEISM)
KEY FIGURES
SAM HARRIS
suggests faith is aligned w/ ignorance + ?hatred?, while reason + honesty→ loving society
believes no empirical evidence for religion exists, and has caused conflict, terrorism, torture
similar to freud: compares religion to mental illness, e.g. hallucinations, paranoia (linking to religious practices)
talks about tolerance for religious beliefs/ opinions + how some shouldn't be tolerated
focus on dangers on extremist groups
RICHARD DAWKINS
argues religion is damaging; religion is root for wars/ terrorism, encourages warped morality + blindly following authority
believes it isn't rational to believe in god
attacked christian design arguments, saying evidence can be explained through natural processes
supported by darwin's ideas of genetics; argues human altruism is how genes reproduce rather than having anything to do with god
DANIEL DENNETT
suggests (like freud) that religion comes from folk beliefs
argues religion should be analysed scientifically + studied as human phenomenon
religion = human construction; believes there's no harm in holding allegedly false religious belief as long as it doesn't harm anyone
religion = 'spell'
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS
religion is introlerant - encourages bigotry, ?racism?, ignorance, oppression of women, + hostile to scientific enquiry
argues bible is nothing more than collection of oral traditions w/ no basis + is full of contradictions
religion relies on understanding of the world, which he says is outdated
argues religion originates from human tendency to have faith in something external due to fears relating to morality, but encourages harmful behaviours
believes religion is damaging to society + human wellbeing, hostile to women
CRITICISMS FROM NEW ATHEISM
they're in the doc
AO2
CHALLENGES
RELIGIOUS APOLOGISTS
new atheism focusses on anecdotal evidence of misuse of religion instead of religious content
new atheists are wrong to only focus on misuse, when believers have contributed to such as civil rights, charity, overseas aid; new atheism manipulates their presentation of religion
new atheism book critics say new atheists are ill-informed, and none are experts in religion, dismissing scholars, cultural + social reform, only focusing on blind followers
'straw man' - logical fallacy
: the position one wishes to attack is ridiculed, not accurately representing a p.o.v
keith ward
: religion has done much good over the centuries and without it, human society would be considerably worse off
richard swinburne
: religious belief isn't contradictory + can be held by rational thinking human beings
atheists refuse to associate with militant atheism;
owen jones (left journalist)
: richard dawkins uses atheism as a platform for anti-muslim bigotry (doesn't represent most atheists)
SCIENCE & RELIGION
believers reject new atheism's claim of science and religion being incompatible; religion is actually supportive + there are believers who have scientific careers
examples
georges lemaire - roman catholic priest; discovered the universe is expanding
muslims have made large contributions to maths + science in middle ages (e.g. al-khwarizmi, al-ghazali)
alister mcgrath: from atheism to christianity through science. says richard dawkins lacks expertise in religion + psychology; the idea of god new atheists have has nothing to do with christianity's god
FUNDAMENTALIST RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY
fundamentalist christians believe the world was created as said in genesis, which new atheists targeted, but believers only reaffirmed truth of the bible
fundamentalist christians believe the bible speaks the truth, as it comes from god and anything opposing/ suggesting otherwise is wrong
islam sees growth in fundamentalism too; some muslims see media as great threat to faith, sticking to teachings/ cultural practices of faith because of this
OTHER
HOW PERSUASIVE NEW ATHEIST ARGUMENTS ARE
there is a point made with the idea of religion being infantile - relying on god encourages dependence + not taking accountability. there are also similarities with parent-child relationships
the claim of religion being incoherent being correct - god being considered omnipotent/ omnibenevolent while evil and suffering exists is contradictory
children should have the right to their own beliefs and values - they should not be indoctrinated and made to fear god
religion is not infantile - several believers in history have had great bravery to act for the benefit of society. new atheism fails to consider the history of religious social reformers
atheist ideologies have caused significant harm in the past - nazism, for example. religions mostly teach valuing peace and resorting to extreme means are often a very last resort
children who grow up in religious backgrounds can benefit from such - they feel a sense of belonging and security. it encourages self-discipline and gives them opportunities to be active in their communities