In David A. Williamson and George Yancey’s book, There Is No God, Atheists in America, they do a great job of stating a clear argument that they will be testing throughout the chapters in the book. The chapters are also split up into easy to read topics that allow for a better understanding of the book. They start off by giving the reader a brief history and understanding of Atheism before discussing who the atheists really are. After a few chapters about that they go into the ways atheists view religion as being foolish and how politics is a principle of atheism. They wrap up the book by writing about atheism in the United States and giving a final conclusion where they restate their initial hypothesis and bring it all together too summarize what their studies have found. In the following paragraphs I will be giving my critical review of this book and examining what great things the authors have done and things they may have been able to do to make the book better.
In the first chapter of the book, the authors describe and try to get an understanding of atheism in the United States. Here is where the authors set up boundaries for the people they are going to be considering atheists for the continuation of the book. Those people they are focusing on are the ones who refer to themselves as atheists and make up 24% of the 5% of Americans that reported they did not believe in God. It is clear in this chapter that as the generations are changing, so has atheism and religion in the United States. With this new atheism comes a surge of numbers for people who report themselves as atheists, although the numbers may still be the same, more people may be publicly saying they are atheist.
Through their research for writing this book,...
... middle of paper ...
...late the reader to the atheist and really view how the atheists were speaking.
This book has led me questioning my own beliefs and has accomplished its goal of explaining and going into detail of atheists and their beliefs. Although they cannot be full understood without more research this book and the research done by the authors have created great starting conclusions for the understanding of atheists. After reading this book it is clear that atheism seeks to negate the social action of religion and that their aggressive traits are formed through religions trying to influence society. Atheists also derive their morality from the idea that what is good will save us. Atheists also come about from all parts of the United States and no matter if the come from a religious family or not, higher education seems to have an effect on their views of the supernatural.
The United States is commonly thought to be on an inevitable march towards secularization. Scientific thought and the failure of the enlightenment to reconcile the concept of god within a scientific framework are commonly thought to have created the antithesis of religious practice in the rise of the scientific method. However, the rise of doubt and the perception that secularization is increasing over time has in actuality caused an increase in religious practice in the United States through episodic revivals. Moreover, practice of unbelief has developed into a movement based in the positive assertion in the supplantation of God by the foundations of science, or even in the outright disbelief in God. The perception of increasing secularism in the United States spurs religious revivalism which underscores the ebb and flow of religious practice in the United States and the foundation of alternative movements which combines to form the reality that the United States is not marching towards secularism but instead religious diversity.
Craig William Lane. The Absurdity of Life without God. reasonablefaith.org, n.d. Web February 28, 2013.
In Stephen Prothero’s, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know and Doesn’t (New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2007), 297 we discover the average American’s lack of religious knowledge. Prothero discusses religious illiteracy in three ways. How it exists, came to be, and just how to possibly solve this problem. Today religious illiteracy is at least as pervasive as cultural illiteracy, and certainly more dangerous. Religious illiteracy is more dangerous because religion is the most volatile constituent of culture, because religion has been, in addition to one of the greatest forces for good in world history, one of the greatest forces for evil. Religion has always been a major factor in US politics and international affairs.
Does God exist? That is the question that so many scholars, peasants, governments, and individuals have been trying to answer from the beginning of human civilization to the present and beyond. Every group in the history of mankind, from Taiwan to Jamaica, from the top of Russia to the bottom of Chile, has said yes to a form of divinity. Their religions have ranged from one God to one million Gods to no God and these religions have defined culture, tradition, lifestyle, and the society of the place; they have ruled nations and defined nations, inspired nations and controlled nations. Not every person has been a believer but every culture has had a belief. Yet somehow, despite this vast evidence that there must be something or else everyone in the history of mankind is delusional, atheism has taken rise in the west. “Science” is the new salvation and human’s greatest belief in something grater is simply a mistake. Great atheists have arisen: Dawkins, Nagel, Harris, Hitchens, and Dennett, just to name a few, have taken hold of America. No longer is religion the way; now religion, specifically Christianity, is the bane of mankind. So we shall take a look at their convincing ideas and twisted words, through the work of Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker in Answering the New Atheism, to examine the question: Does God exist?
In conclusion, McCloskey attempted to defeat the cosmological and teleological argument and tried to persuade the readers to embrace the view of atheism. That there is no God and that this life is the only one a person can have. He tried influencing people by asking why a perfect God make an imperfect world. Or why did God not make humans to choose the right decision automatically, so that they can avoid suffering? However, in the end, although his arguments are sound and he made very reasonable points. The facts remain that there must be something out there that made the universe and that has created us complex beings. This same being must have be able to give man the choice to make his own decision, even if it were the wrong one. There is only one possible being that could do that and that is none other than God.
H J McCloskey intelligently put his thoughts together and shared his beliefs in his article called “On Being an Athiest” addressing some key arguments discussed in atheism and theism from an atheistic point of view. He makes no apologies for bringing up a difficult topic and for trying to argue persuasively for his views. He makes a great point when he states, “…I make no apology for doing so, as it is useful for us to remind ourselves of the reasons for and virtues of our beliefs (50).” Whether a theist or an atheist we should know what we believe and why we believe what we believe. This paper will use the material recently studied in Philosophy to respond to “proofs” and ideas put forth by McCloskey in his article.
H.J McCloskey’s article, “On Being an Atheist,” is an attempt to show atheism as a more practical alternative to the Christian belief. McCloskey reasons against the theistic beliefs of the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and design. He references the presence of evil in a world created by God and the absurdity of living by faith. This article is an attempt to reason that God does not exist because He is perfect and the world is not perfect; evil exists therefore God cannot exist. McCloskey’s article labels these arguments as “proofs” and concludes none of these arguments would be evidence of God’s existence. I find McCloskey’s article to lack logic and coherence which only serves to invalidate his arguments. I find this little more than an attempt to justify his own atheistic worldview.
Penn Jillette is a very well-known atheist and a research fellow at Cato Institute and has lectured at Oxford and MIT. He also authored an article entitled, “There is no God.” In this article, Jillette declares himself to be “beyond atheism.” He argues that everyone needs to take a step back and start with no belief in God. Then, we can all start to look for evidence of God. Even Jillette believes that whatever conclusion we end up with, it has to be “some leap of faith that helps one see life’s big picture, some rules to live by.” Jillette's conclusion is simply “This I believe: I believe there is no God.” The rest of the article he goes on to explain that this decision has informed every moment of his life. He concludes his article by stating that believing there is no God gives him more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, and beauty.
“Death to God, all hail reason!”, cries out the secular world, fervent for nothing but themselves. The new age of skepticism has come, ushered in by God-hating men and dictators bound to satan; and its zealots follow in the footsteps of the rest of the world. They lay down cheerfully in valleys of dry bones and their banner stands, waving through air that is choked by the smoke that rises from their fathers burning in Hell, its motto, “Love and Tolerance.” Words bought by the blood of anyone who dissented. This is the fruit of the religion of Atheism.
Hitchens, Christopher. "An Atheist Responds." The Washington Post. N.p., 15 July 2007. Web. 20 Oct. 2012.
Contrary to popular belief, there is not so much a “war on Christianity” as there is a war on the first amendment by the religious and atheists. However, if we are to have this discussion properly, we must assert which is better for moral and ethical teaching. Paul Kurtz in his article, Atheism Teaches Morality and Ethics, argues from the view that—though it is quite obvious from the title—atheism is the best source for these teachings; Stephen J. Pope argues from the opposite view in his article, Only Religion Can Teach Morality and Ethics. Although I do not believe either writer quite gets it right, these two present quality perspectives from both sides of the aisle.
The topic of atheism has become an increasingly investigated topic in the United States. With the slow, but steady, rise of the atheist population in the United States, the inquiry is becoming more relevant in modern research. The atheist population in America are considered to be cognitively deviant because they reject a theist view which are the majority. They are also one of the most discriminated groups and hold a very large and pervasive stigma.. There are a multitude of recent studies that address the topic of atheism in the United States in varying ways.
...ferences and similarities as its predecessor atheism. Individuals and groups continue to assert their ideologies through their writings and critics continue to rebut these claims. As discussed, new atheism has shown evident different approaches in showing how religion has detrimental effects on society using events such as the many previous wars that have been initiated due to issues concerning religion. New atheism also addresses how these views and conceptions are forced upon children which highlight the significant developments of the ideas that have emerged since traditional atheistic times. By understanding how atheism and new atheism has developed and evolved, it can also be understood that there will be an endless and continuous arrivals of more diverse interpretations, approaches and goals of new atheism and issues revolving around religion in the future.
The Canadian philosopher J.L. Schellenberg has recently put forward an argument for atheism based on the idea that God is supposed to be perfectly loving and so would not permit people to be deprived of awareness of his existence. If such a deity were to exist, then, he would do something to reveal his existence clearly to people, thereby causing them to become theists. Thus, the fact that there are so many non-theists in the world becomes good reason to deny the existence of God conceived of in the given way. I first raise objections to Schellenberg’s formulation of the argument and then suggest some improvements. My main improvement is to include among the divine attributes the property of strongly desiring humanity’s love. Since to love God requires at least believing that he exists, if God were to exist, he must want widespread theistic belief. The fact that so many people lack such belief becomes a good argument for atheism with respect to God conceived of in the given way. Some objections to this line of reasoning are considered, in particular the claim that God refrains from revealing himself to people in order to avoid interfering with their free will or to avoid eliciting inappropriate responses from them or some other (unknown) purpose. An attempt is made to refute each of these objections.
6. Bohdan R. Bociurkiw and John W. Strong, Religion and Atheism in the U.S.S.R. and