I can field this question, Mr. Dawkins.

From this press release on a recent atheist convention (HT: dangerous idea):

“If you’ve been taught to believe it [religion] by moderates, what’s to stop you from taking the next step and blowing yourself up?” [Dawkins] said.

This is going to be a shocker, Dicky…

…wait for it…

REASON.

This is one thing that annoys me more than anything about most of the New Atheists: they think that they have a monopoly on the truth. (Who does that sound like? Anyone?) What’s worse, they think they have a monopoly on what is to them the only way of finding out the truth. At least the theist can say, “Well, I don’t think your belief is correct, but I can see how you came up with it.” This sort of atheist can’t even give anyone else the benefit of the doubt, and the whole thing seems to be on the basis of mistaking process for product: people can be rational without coming out with the same conclusions. Surely history must prove that, or we must judge every past generation irrational rather than just ignorant of things we know now.

I agreed with him from the start, but Macht of prosthesis is dead on about the New Atheists.

Advertisements

2 Responses to I can field this question, Mr. Dawkins.

  1. gukseon says:

    I think what irritates me the most about the “New Atheists” is not so much their arguments (which I find amusing), but the amount of credibility they receive.

    Dawkins, it seems to me, has little understanding of reason—-perhaps because he never seems to use it in his discussion of religion?

  2. Brody says:

    You’re right; that is terribly irritating. Which makes the predicament of those like myself who observe the New Atheists’ position as the harbingers of rationality and Truth so much more difficult because we help them with publicity when they say what they do. I would like them to go away, but is ignoring them really any better than pointing out how ridiculous they are?

%d bloggers like this: