"Atheists are stuck up"

43 posts / 0 new
Last post
Vincent Paul Tran's picture
This is a heavy laden

This is a heavy laden question. Forgiv me as I attempt to compact my worldview and experiences in a few sentences, which I will most likely butcher. Please kindly be patient.

Atheists by their nature have to be arrogant. They have chosen to live a life with a belief system independant of relgion, indoctrination, propoganda and others. This means you are left with you and your brain. By neccessity, this is "arrogant" in a nonsparaging way.

As to the in your face attacks to Christians, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Indians and the other religious, I cannot account for this. First, I see no agenda. I only see three possible agendas for militant atheism :

1. Education for the sake of education
2. Education for the sake of conversion
3. Self preservation

I don't see how any of the tactics Of The New Atheism Movement contribute to these goals. In fact, they destroy any progress the more pleasant, nice and peaceful Atheists done.

If anyone can claify my confusion, it would be greatly appreciated

- Cheers :)

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
"Atheists by their nature

"Atheists by their nature have to be arrogant."
LOL I wonder what will you present to even hint that?
Arrogant because we are humble enough to accept that we don't know things?, instead of being arrogant and claim god did it?

"They have chosen to live a life with a belief system independent of religion, indoctrination, propaganda and others."
Atheism is not a belief system, it the lack of belief.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNDZb0KtJDk

"This means you are left with you and your brain."
Atheism makes no claim, what so ever, it just does not believe in the theistic gods.
Your lack of belief in Father Christmas says nothing about what you are left with, being you and your brain or more.

You did not define what you think militant atheism is.

Until you do, the rest of your post makes no sens.

ThePragmatic's picture
The word atheism is a

@Vincent paul tran

The word atheism is a stigmatized word, bringing a ton of prejudice with it.

The sub-group of atheists that claim to know that there is no gods, could justifiably be called arrogant. But my impression is that they are a minority among atheists.

However, I think it has to be clarified that this does not include claiming to know that a specific god as described by a specific religious text, does not exist.
For example: The incoherent nature of Yahweh / The holy ghost / Jesus and the contradictory passages in the bible are self refuting.
I don't think it's arrogant to claim to know that the god of the bible does not exist, if you interpret the bible literally. But as soon as the picking and choosing starts, the definition of that god changes and becomes fussy, then it becomes another matter.

If you use the definition of atheism that most atheists seem to agree on, "The lack of belief in a god or gods", and thereby remove the extra implications, you can't really claim that "Atheists by their nature have to be arrogant".
Would you call a secular humanist arrogant?

As a child, there were things that could make me believe in gods or other supernatural entities. But education, curiosity and thirst for understanding, continuously diminishes the ignorance and the risk of misinterpretation of our experiences. Today, I see noting that makes me believe that there is any gods. In other words, I lack a belief in a god or gods. Is it arrogant to not have belief in something that there is reason to believe in?

"This means you are left with you and your brain. By neccessity, this is "arrogant" in a nonsparaging way."

I don't get "nonsparaging" at all, what does it mean?

Anyway, I get your meaning. But please explain what is arrogant about not making wild assumptions, and instead wait for some form of evidence to support what you believe in?

Militant-atheism, is as I understand it just another word for anti-theism. Please, have a read in the thread "The dark side of Theism" and you will find ample reason to be an anti-theist. The bad effects of theism is by no means hidden, just keep up with the news and every day there is a lot of scary crap caused by such irrational beliefs.
(Although, some effects are hidden. Namely the massive sexual abuse that churches and the Vatican actively tries to hide. But each day more and more of this keeps spilling out into the news media.)

"I don't see how any of the tactics Of The New Atheism Movement contribute to these goals. In fact, they destroy any progress the more pleasant, nice and peaceful Atheists done."

What do you mean, what exactly do they destroy?

chefu's picture
WE are not arrogant, being

We are not arrogant, being arrogant is "knowing"
but with no evidence and proof.

Vincent Paul Tran's picture
My assumption is this

My assumption is this movement is trying to persuade hearts and minds. But when I watch the news, the atheists portray themselves as people who simply know better and aren't interested in people as people. Without the compassion and empathy gambit, their appraoch simply will not work. You don't change believe with cold logic. You change it by concerning yourself with the nature and position of the person you are interacting with.

Neil Degrasse Tyson says it best in his reproach of Ricahrd Dawkins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2Aw9UGYNsA

As to the arrogance thing, I don't say that as a positive or negative thing. I'm saying atheists have to be independant agents of their morality, epistomology, and ethics if they are to be intellectually honest

Cheers :)

ThePragmatic's picture
@Vincent paul tran

@Vincent paul tran

I don't mean to put you down, but instead to give you some honest feedback: I think your argument got a very unfortunate start.

It sounded very much like a passive aggressive accusation:
"Atheists by their nature have to be arrogant. They have chosen to live a life with a belief system independant of relgion, indoctrination, propoganda and others."

You didn't specify any particular group of atheists when claiming they are arrogant by nature. This seems like an accusation of bad character on every atheist out there. Then, after claiming that they are all arrogant without any element of choice, you say they have "chosen" a belief system, as if it's a fully conscious choice to not believe. I didn't choose to not believe, I find it impossible to believe such obvious fairy tails and fabricated texts.

"This means you are left with you and your brain. By neccessity, this is "arrogant""

I'm still struggling to even understand how you find this arrogant. The most honest answer to the "hard" questions, is "I don't know". And if we don't know, there is no reason to try to find comfort in inserting a god or a life after death in eternal bliss in heaven.
On the contrary, I find it extremely arrogant and self centred to do as people of faith do, to assume that "my beliefs are the truth", "god loves me", "god listens to my prayers", without basing that on anything connected to the reality outside of their head.
I find it hard to think of anything more arrogant than to think that the all mighty creator of the universe loves me, listens to me, saves me and I will get to live with him in heaven forever.

"My assumption is this movement is trying to persuade hearts and minds. But when I watch the news, the atheists portray themselves as people who simply know better and aren't interested in people as people. Without the compassion and empathy gambit, their appraoch simply will not work."

I understand that Richard Dawkins is thought of this way, his approach is close to "Shock and awe". But I think you are to quick to assume that it won't work. People are different and some needs to be shaken to wake up, while others respond better to Neil deGrass Tyson's approach.
I have read several people thanking Dawkins for waking them up. Besides, without Dawkins we wouldn't have funny email readings like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYsREU906fw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7607YiBso

Neil deGrasse Tyson is excellent in his approach and can really express himself with words. He is also extremely passionate, to the point of getting absurd. :)
This is a edited version of "The storytelling of science", showing mostly Tyson's hilarious outbursts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jfmd_OPVORo

Vincent Paul Tran's picture
*shrug. I'm not good with

*shrug. I'm not good with the english language (I'm better at chinese). Sorry for any confusions. I would clarify, but any attempts to do it in English would muddle the process :P

LongDoggy's picture
And we eat babies, too!!

And we eat babies, too!!

Deforres's picture
And we necro post^

And we necro post^

Pitar's picture
What I will say is there's

What I will say is there's the atheist and then there's the anti-theist. Some will argue they are one in the same while others maintain they are distinct. If we can get past that bit of misunderstanding atheists will earn a (tolerated) place amongst theists.

The tee shirts are anti-theist slogans, nothing more.

chefu's picture
Lol we are not "All knowing"

Lol we are not "All knowing" but all questioning!
all knowing would be to say we know it all (the religious say they know! there is a good)
All knowing is the hat they wear, but not ours...

NameRemovedByMod's picture
Well I have had much

Well I have had much experience with theists who were full of themselves and not afraid to wear t-shirts about non believers going to hell and my brother in law wears one that say's I am one of those christians you should fear! It goes both ways. IMO atheists are at he very least more logical and more educated.

Christians are like sheep and do not question much of anything. Faith, blah, blah , blah.

Maybe the arrogance is because they are smarter and know more about science and reason.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.