Friday, March 20, 2009

An Atheist Against The New Atheism

It is only because of historical accident that atheism is not widely recognised as a world-view in its own right. This world view is essentially a very general form of naturalism, in which there are not two kinds of stuff, the natural and the supernatural, but one. The forces that govern this substance are also natural ones and there is no ultimate purpose or agency behind them. Human life is biological, and thus does not survive beyond biological death.

Quote taken from The New Atheist Movement is destructive Apparently from reviews, atheists aren't too happy about this article.

In addition to encouraging Christians to read this article for information, my desire here is to draw out some points worth noting from one of the paragraphs in the article dealing not so much with the new atheism but with the author's own atheistic beliefs.

In atheism (this author's view)
1. If there is "no purpose" behind what governs then how can things happen by "historical accident"? Besides, what is the standard to measure if something is an accident? How do we know what is accident and what isn't? If this happened by historical accident what else did and how do we tell? If no purpose, then what matters and why care?
2. No grounds given for the assertion that "there are not two kinds of stuff, the natural and the supernatural, but one."
3. No grounds given for "no ultimate purpose or agency behind" the forces that govern this world. Additionally, this means if a person dies as a result of natural forces, they are simply a victim. Additionally, if there is no supernatural, then absolutes of justice, accountability, and truth do not exist, and whereas atheists may claim if it were proved there was no god that things would not change much tomorrow (which I disagree with) then why speak beyond what a person just does to what they should do? (Note: a statement such as "we all know" or "an overwhelming majority of men agree" that we should do that that promote humanity ... points to some measure to absolute truth, etc.)
4. For this atheist, human life boils down to simply the biological. As history of worldviews has shown, this view runs into problems when it comes to experience, human dignity, human consciousness, etc.
5. No grounds noted for assertion that humans do not survive beyond biological death.

No comments:

Post a Comment