Friendly Atheism

I consider myself an infant when it comes to my philosophical stature, but I continue to find it extremely fascinating. This semester I enrolled in a Philosophy of Religion class because it was obviously a topic that interested me and, to be honest, I wanted to refine my arguments so that I could shame my theistic friends for their beliefs. I felt that religious belief was totally irrational and unreasonable; you could say that I entered the class an unfriendly atheist. What I have taken from the class however has been surprising.

William L. Rowe is one of the authors of the textbook we are using in that class. He is a philosopher and atheist and is a professor emeritus at Purdue University. There is an article of his in the book that discusses a few forms of atheism. Rowe points out that there are three ways that an atheist may view the theist. First, “the atheist may believe that no one is rationally justified in believing that the theistic God exists.” This he calls “unfriendly atheism.” Second, “the atheist may hold no belief concerning whether any theist is or isn’t rationally justified in believing that the theistic God exists.” This he calls “indifferent atheism.” And last, “the atheist may believe that some theists are rationally justified in believing that the theistic God exists.” This he calls “friendly atheism.”

To clarify, it may be good to point out that Rowe does not say that the friendly atheist accepts the theistic belief as true, but merely that the theist is not irrational in his or her beliefs. It may also be good to point out that he is discussing the rationality of religious belief and not the reasonableness of theistic belief. A distinction can be seen in an example: an individual may rack up tons of debt because he/she is planning on winning the lottery to pay it off. Yes these thoughts may in the strictest sense of the word be rational, but they are certainly not reasonable.

But here is where it becomes a little tricky. For in this case, both parties are privy to the same information yet they come to different conclusions. Can both be rationally held? Or must one be irrational by necessity? Rowe believes the former. Another author in a separate article in the book uses an example in science. Can two researchers be studying the same scientific question and come to separate conclusions and both be rational in their decisions? It seems that they can.

Rowe then goes on, “What sort of grounds might a theist have for believing that God exists? Well, he might endeavor to justify his belief by appealing to one or more of the traditional arguments: Ontological, Cosmological, Teleological, Moral, etc. Second, he might appeal to certain aspects of religious experience… Third, he might try to justify theism as a plausible theory in terms of which we can account for a variety of phenomena.”

Again, it is irrelevant whether or not you believe these arguments to be true, when considering their rationality. Rowe believes that the arguments put forth by theists are false, but he also thinks the arguments can be rationally held by the believer. He would therefore consider himself a friendly atheist, and I am inclined to agree with him at this point. I am still an atheist, but I no longer look at all religious people as morons. Hopefully I didn’t slaughter Rowe’s argument too much in my interpretation. But anyway, I figured I would toss this out to all of you to see what your thoughts were on the matter.

How do you view religious belief? If you are atheist, are you friendly or unfriendly?

Taking the shine off, or putting it on?

This may well amount to blasphemy on the SHAFT blog, but I have never really found ‘New Atheism,’ as represented by Dawkins, Hitchens, etc., to be very convincing or appealing. To be fair, by many standards, I am a pretty lousy atheist: I have a soft spot for theology; I am skeptical of any attempt to enshrine science or pure rationality as the determiners of truth; and I have doubts about whether rationally proving God’s nonexistence is possible.

But for me, The God Delusion and similar books essentially present atheism as a negation. They leave me feeling like I did when I first abandoned theism: the feeling that something had been lost; that the numinous had been emptied out of the world; that, rather than a newfound freedom to create a new way of living, I now found myself having to conform my beliefs and actions to a strictly rational, materialist worldview, one which seemed little less stifling than the God I had left behind.

It is with that caveat that I mention Hubert Dreyfus’ and Sean Dorrance Kelly’s All Things Shining, published earlier this year. Its project is probably best described as ‘post-theism’: Dreyfus and Kelley attempt to create a secular practice of living—a religion, if you will—where the sacred erupts in moments as diverse as examining an artwork or watching a baseball game.

Part of what makes their argument fascinating is the way it reclaims much of western culture and even religious thinkers for secularism: from Homer to the Gospel of John to Martin Luther, Dreyfus and Kelly draw on theistic thought while giving it a secular, decidedly nontheistic spin—a method I think is preferable and richer than dismissing it all out of hand. The book, based on their popular undergraduate class at Berkeley, is intended for the general readership, and is somewhat cursory in its argument. Despite that limitation, and some quibbles about their interpretations of Nietzsche, I found the book exhilarating—for me, it was the most thought-provoking book I have read on atheism since Martin Hägglund’s.

It also left me wondering, however, if these two strands of atheism—with the ‘post-theism’ of Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Derrida on the one hand, and the ‘rational atheism’ of Hume, Russell, and the ‘New Atheists’ on the other—are starry-eyed apples and glowering oranges. Do they merely serving different purposes, or are they actually incommensurable?

What do you think, SHAFT-ers?

Victor Stenger lecture at the University of Utah

Today, from 4-6 PM at the University of Utah’s Orson Spencer Hall (OSH) Auditorium, Dr. Victor Stenger will be giving a talk partly based on his latest book, The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning.

Stenger, a philosopher and physicist, is a among the foremost “new atheist” thinkers. He has written several books about atheism and science, including the bestseller God: The Failed Hypothesis and the critically-acclaimed The New Atheism.

The event, which is being organized by our sister group SHIFT, will be free and open to the public, with free parking available in the visitor parking lot just east of the Union building (just north of OSH). Seating will be first-come-first-served. The doors to the auditorium will be opened 30 minutes before the event.

Here is a campus map to help you find the event.

It promises to be fun and intellectually stimulating, so I hope to see you there!

Link bomb #23

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman details the Republican war against science.

Several groups, notably the National Academy of Sciences, are encouraging scientists to be more vocal politically and even run for office. Scientists have a lot to contribute to our political discourse, especially where it concerns issues like climate change and stem-cell research. But unfortunately, scientific literacy isn’t a perfect safeguard against believing in silly things.

The Standard-Examiner had an interesting history piece about Ernest L. Wilkinson’s ultra-conservative tenure as BYU president from 1951 to 1971. Wilkinson led a thuggish school spy ring that conducted witch hunts against suspected communists, atheists, homosexuals, and others.

Atheist writer Sam Harris spends another hour on YouTube to answer questions submitted by users of Reddit.com. Topics include science, morality, free will, and religion. Here is the first Q&A session he did back in June.

Dad’s Primal Scream poses some difficult questions to Mormons, many of which deal with the nature of progressive revelation and the role of prophets.

Steve Gershom explains how he’s “doing fine” as a gay, devout Catholic. His is an interesting perspective in that he maintains that homosexuality is a sin.

Fox News received over 8,000 death threats after Blair Scott of American Atheists discussed the group’s lawsuit to stop a cross from being erected at the WTC Memorial on the network’s “America Live”.

There is a growing rift within America’s evangelical Christian community, with an increasing number of conservative Bible scholars doubting the existence of Adam and Eve—something that is widely and uncritically accepted by the laity.

Secularism is gaining ground with every generation in the United States. Even reliably religious demographics like Hispanics, less-educated whites and women have seen a marked decrease in religiosity. That CFI has announced the first ever Women in Secularism conference reflects this trending.

A typo of Biblical proportions: A 1631 printing of the Bible read “Thou shalt commit adultery” instead of “Thou shalt not commit adultery”.

50 renowned (atheist/agnostic) academics speak about god. And another 50, for good measure.

Andrew S. of Irresistible (Dis)Grace explains why ex-Mormons appear to be so angry in an insightful two-part series (part 1, part 2). I addressed this subject in my post “Am I an anti-Mormon” as well.

4 good reasons not to read the Bible literally.

As the LDS Church became more racially sensitive, folklore about Cain and Bigfoot became less pervasive. I suppose the traditional image of Cain as a big black man became less palatable after members’ attitude and the church’s policies toward blacks changed.

A fun, instructional video on how to resign from the LDS Church.

Mormon blogger Joanna Brooks, writing for the Washington Post, debunks 5 myths about Mormonism.

NPR sparked a fury over its report last month on so-called “ex-gay conversion” therapies. Some felt the piece created a false balance and legitimized the discredited practice. Another shortcoming is that it failed to mention that the protagonist is LDS and that the ex-gay programs he attended also had Mormon ties.

A video on the strange powers of the placebo effect.

Doves & Serpents compiled a list of the worst LDS talks. Ezra Taft Benson, Dallin H. Oaks, and Boyd K. Packer are the most frequent repeat offenders.

Wikileaks accidentally released thousands of dangerous documents that revealed the identities of confidential agents and sources. Earlier this year, I wrote a post critical of Wikileaks for leaking similarly life-threatening information.

A US pastor calls for a national registry for atheists. His justification: “There are already national registries for convicted sex offenders, ex-convicts, terrorist cells, hate groups like the KKK, skinheads, radical Islamists, etc..” Here is The Thinking Atheist’s video response.

My friend Dan writes about his encounter with homophobia at a Logan physical therapy clinic.

New York Times editor Bill Keller asks us to “confront our scruples about the privacy of faith in public life—and to get over them.” He argues that we ought to ask tougher questions about candidates’ religions, and Joanna Brooks volunteers a few questions to ask Huntsman and Romney about their Mormon faith.

17 misconceptions about evolution and their responses.

Why we don’t need religion to be moral or have an objective moral worldview.

The Book of Morma is the feminine counterpart to the Book of Mormon. From the book’s site: “In this imaginary parallel universe, a female Goddess has established a plan of salvation and ordained her only borne Daughter to be the Savioress of the world.  Priestesses and prophetesses bring the heavenly messages to the people through a matriarchal order.” I love this project, because the real Book of Mormon has a curious dearth of women in it.

The Boston Globe gives a brief history of Mormons’ involvement in politics.

Salt Lake City ranks 3rd for same-sex couples among mid-sized US cities, behind Fort Lauderdale and Berkeley. The number of reported same-sex couples living together in Utah jumped 73 percent over the past decade, according to recently released Census data. And while Utah as a whole strongly opposes gay marriage, a majority of young Utahns support it.

Dr. Michael Coe, arguably the preeminent scholar in Mesomerican studies, talks to Mormon Stories about the ever-elusive Book of Mormon geography and archeology.

Mormon Stories also interviewed LDS scholar and apologist Daniel C. Peterson. I often disagree with Peterson on Mormonism, but I agree with much of his critical review of Christopher Hitchen’s book God is Not Great.

My friend Neal runs an amateur Mormon apologetics blog, and in his most recent post, he asks that Mormons abandon this popular but false argument for the Book of Mormon’s historicity.

Speaking of religious apologetics, philosopher William Lane Craig is among the foremost defenders of Christianity and a seasoned debater. Craig has requested a debate with Richard Dawkins, but Dawkins has not taken him up on the invitation.

Those atheists who have debated Craig have almost uniformly lost—including Hitchens, who is himself an experienced and spirited debater. Only Yale professor Shelly Kagan has soundly bested Craig, in my opinion.

FLDS leader Warren Jeffs was recently sentenced to life for child rape, and it seems he has been attempting suicide—perhaps hoping to be a martyr—while in jail. He is in serious condition, and is having to be force-fed to be kept alive.

With polygamy back in the news, some comparisons between Jeffs and Joseph Smith have been made. I don’t think the comparison is fair or apt, but then again, Smith had the benefit of not living in an age of video cameras and tape recorders.

An analysis of the LDS Church’s highly effective SEO practices. (SEO stands for “search engine optimization”; the church has been successful in dominating search results and driving traffic to its sites.)

100 facts every teen atheist must know. My list of must-know facts would’ve been different, but it’s an interesting and informative list all the same.

Girls locked up inside fundamentalist religious compounds. Kandahar? No, Missouri.

Michelle Bachmann recently hired Peter Waldron to her campaign staff. Waldron has been accused of and arrested for terrorism in Uganda. He was also a prominent proponent of Uganda’s internationally-decried “Kill the Gays” bill.

Contrary to many think, Muslim Americans are the staunchest opponents of military attacks on civilians compared with members of other major religious groups Gallup has studied in the United States.

Magician and atheist Penn Jillette has a new book out, God, No!. Something about practicing magic seems to lend itself to atheism.

Atheists generally have an aversion to the word “belief”, especially in the context of the evolution/creationism debate, because it has a religious connotation and is often confused to mean mere opinion. CFI blogger Michael De Dora argues that his fellow atheists needn’t harbor such reservations about “belief”.

Brandon Pearce shares his essay on why he left the LDS Church.

A concert event (“Rock Beyond Belief”) organized by atheist, agnostic and other non-theist soldiers has been cleared by the Army to take place next spring at Fort Bragg.

The Mormon blog Millennial Star compares apostasy to conspiracy thinking. The comparison may sound offensive or absurd at first blush, but the author’s discussion of the issue is thoughtful.

The New Yorker explains how a godless universe isn’t devoid of meaning and how secularism can be a positive affirmation of the here and now.

Arguably, an 800-page compilation of the best essays of Christopher Hitchens’ career, came out this weekend. It may well be his last book, as Hitchens was diagnosed with cancer last year.

My name is Jack, and I’m an ex-Mormon

My friend and fellow SHAFTer Jack was recently interviewed for the “I am an ex-Mormon” video series. In his interview, he discusses his experiences as a bisexual woman in the LDS Church and his life now as a transgender individual.

Jack, you’re an incredibly courageous person. Thanks for sharing your inspiring story! I regret not having gotten to know you better while at USU.

The SHAFT site turns two years old!

The USU SHAFT blog has been active now for two years; the first post was published August 13th, 2009. I want to thank all of you who have followed us from the beginning, and welcome those who have just recently stumbled upon our blog.

Despite my being less prolific as of late, the site still enjoyed increased traffic this year. And, like last year, we also won several Brodies (the Oscars of the Mormon/ex-Mormon blogosphere) for 2010: “Best News Reporting”, “Best LDS Church Watch”, and “Best Science Piece”. SHAFT has won a total of five Brodies, more than any other website.

Continue reading