06.14
Dissension in the Ranks
I read the article that STR’s blog linked to this morning about some disputes in the atheist community. It’s a wierd article to say the least, and not very informative. But it did have a couple of nuggets that got me thinking along other lines. The first was this statement:
“In March, in remarks to the Associated Press, Epstein called the popular writers Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins “atheist fundamentalists.” … (Harris calls the term atheist fundamentalist “an empty play on words.”)
–Lisa Miller, Newsweek
Now why would Sam Harris get his hackle up about being called an atheist fundamentalist? Webster defines fundamentalism as “a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles”. So is Sam Harris saying that he doesn’t stress strict adherence to the basic principles of atheism? Surely not. Maybe he’s saying that the term fundamentalist is so strictly tied to orthodox Christians(who are anathema to Sam) that it’s meaningless in any other context. I disagree wholeheartedly. Just drop the phrase “atheist fundamentalist” in casual conversation and see if you get looks of bewilderment. I am guessing you wouldn’t. Most informed people will see the implication you are making and understand it quite well.
On the other hand, just a couple of paragraphs down we have this jem of a quote from the radical darwinian camp, criticizing Epstein:
“R. Joseph Hoffmann, senior vice president at the prestigious Center for Inquiry, lashed out at Epstein in a letter he posted online. He accused Epstein of mushy thinking (“Gen-X humanism for the passionately confused”) and of using the Harvard imprimatur to stake out a divisive position.”
–Lisa Miller, Newsweek
So we are to believe from the neo-Neitzcheans that the term “atheist fundamentalist” is an “empty play on words” but the phrase “Gen-X humanism for the passionately confused” is perfectly clear and understandable. That is total rubbish. Pick one of your friends at random and give them both of those phrases in turn and see which one they find the most straightforward and legitimate. By the way, why do all of these new darwinists dress like a Steve Jobs/Jeff Probst mashup? At least Daniel Dennett has a Father Christmas thing going on to change things up a bit.
More on this article later…
