Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Monday, January 1, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments |

Document Let's Hope It's A Lasting Vogue

by Richard Dawkins

Reposted from the Washington Posts' On Faith:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/

Athorism is enjoying a certain vogue right now. Can there be a productive conversation between Valhallans and athorists? Naïve literalists apart, sophisticated thoreologians long ago ceased believing in the material substance of Thor's mighty hammer. But the spiritual essence of hammeriness remains a thunderingly enlightened relevation, and hammerological faith retains its special place in the eschatology of neo-Valhallism, while enjoying a productive conversation with the scientific theory of thunder in its non-overlapping magisterium. Militant athorists are their own worst enemy. Ignorant of the finer points of thoreology, they really should desist from their strident and intolerant strawmandering, and treat Thor-faith with the uniquely protected respect it has always received in the past. In any case, they are doomed to failure. People need Thor, and nothing will ever remove him from the culture. What are you going to put in his place?

Atheism means non-belief in the particular cult that happens to pervade the society under discussion. In America that means the cult of Yahweh, the God of the Jews commandeered by the Christians, Muslims and Mormons. Today, everyone takes it for granted that we are all atheists with respect to Thor and Wotan, Zeus and Poseidon, Mithras and Ammon Ra. If asked why you don't believe in Thor's hammer, you would probably say something like "Why is the onus on me to justify my nonbelief in Thor, given that there is not the smallest positive reason for belief?" You might go further and add that thunder, which was at one time attributed to Thor's hammer, now has a better explanation in terms of electric charges in the clouds. While technically agnostic about all those ancient gods, and about fairies and leprechauns too (you can't disprove them either), in practice we don't believe in any of them, and we feel no onus to explain why.

Today, while almost literally everybody is an athorist, nonbelief in the God of Abraham is the most reviled opinion in America. Professor Anthony M Stevens-Arroyo, one of the On Faith regular panellists, begins his answer to the current question as follows: "I never met an atheist I could like. Surely, somewhere on this planet, there is a friendly atheist, but I haven't bumped into one yet. The atheists who have crossed my path are obnoxious . . ." As an experiment, try substituting the word 'Jew' or 'woman' for 'atheist', and imagine whether a university professor who said those three sentences would keep his job. Yet in present day America, a professor (of "Latino Studies") can publish such odious remarks about atheists and get away with it.

Of those scientists distinguished enough to be elected to the National Academy, more than 90% do not believe in any kind of supernatural God. Needless to say, many of them are likeable, friendly and far from obnoxious, as well as being intelligent, well-educated, happy and productive citizens. An equally high proportion of atheists has recently been disclosed among the Fellows of the Royal Society, and it is plausible that distinguished Academicians in philosophy, history, economics, literature and other disciplines, coming from the same educated and intelligent echelons of society, would yield similar data. One must hope that a respectable proportion of the Congress is drawn from that same educational and intellectual elite, so it is a strong statistical expectation that many of them must be atheists too. Yet I believe I am correct that not a single one of the 535 members of Congress will admit to the fact. A good many have got to be lying, and who can blame them? If they came clean they would be unelectable, as polls have repeatedly confirmed. Atheists are widely assumed to have no morals or values, to have no purpose in life, and to be incapable of love, or of appreciating beauty in art or nature. Who would vote for one of those?

The premise of this week's question is that atheism is enjoying a certain vogue. I hope and believe it is not a flash in the pan. The symptoms of which I am aware are indeed encouraging. Dan Dennett's Breaking the Spell and Sam Harris's Letter to a Christian Nation sold exhilaratingly well through 2006, and my own The God Delusion remains high in the bestseller lists into 2007. Similar success is to be expected during 2007 for Christopher Hitchens's forthcoming God is Not Great, and Victor Stenger's God: the Failed Hypothesis. Such buoyant sales of books advocating out-and-out atheism would have been inconceivable until surprisingly recently. When, six years ago, I first proposed The God Delusion to my literary agent he was blunt: "Don't even think about it." Yet now, after six years of incipient Chrisitian theocracy . . .

On my recent book promotion tour of the USA, the standing ovations I consistently received from packed audiences around the country, (including in Kansas, and Lynchburg, Virginia as well as, more predictably, the so-called 'blue' states) owed nothing to any eloquence or writing skills of mine, and everything, I believe, to a pent-up frustration among reviled freethinkers. Time after time, in the long book signing queues, young Americans (encouragingly young) confided to me, "Thank you, thank you, thank you for saying the things that I have wanted to say, but never felt I could" (see www.RichardDawkins.net). Sam Harris and Dan Dennett report similar experiences from equally large audiences. There is widespread hope that we are seeing the beginnings of a long-overdue shift in the tectonic plates of our culture. Polls suggest that atheists are far more numerous in America than they themselves realize. They well outnumber the Jews, whose political lobby packs a legendarily powerful clout. It is time for America's atheists to take courage from this, and from the books I have mentioned, come out of the closet, stand up, recognize each other, and work together to exert their rightfully proportionate influence on this great democracy. If those books are, as is often dismissively said, preaching to the choir, do not underestimate its size or ability. This is a very large and very talented choir, and the time has come for its music to be heard.

Comments 1 - 28 of 28 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #15543 by Haymoon on January 1, 2007 at 7:25 am

 avatarMore power to your elbow, Richard.

Good luck for 2007 and beyond

Other Comments by Haymoon

2. Comment #15547 by mdowe on January 1, 2007 at 8:11 am

 avatarIt is good to see Professor Dawkins is being published in American newspapers (even those generally perceived to be left-wing). Such strong religious influence in the most powerful nation the Earth has seen to date is a worry to everybody. Is is also heartening that he is being so well received.

One point though -- I would hesitate to claim there are many members of congress that are atheists. Not because I don't believe the statement is true. I just have a sneaky feeling that the religious-right will quickly counter that the it is these closet atheists that are responsible for all the perceived corruption in the American government. Begin witch hunt ...

Other Comments by mdowe

3. Comment #15548 by palebluedot on January 1, 2007 at 8:12 am

Well said Richard! I feel there is very good reason to be hopeful, you are making a difference.

Other Comments by palebluedot

4. Comment #15549 by TranshumanAtheist on January 1, 2007 at 8:21 am

Regarding the "What do you replace it with?" argument, I guess our ancestors had to trash the Hippocratic Oath and abandon medical ethics after they stopped believing in "Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses":

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html

Other Comments by TranshumanAtheist

5. Comment #15552 by jeff_n on January 1, 2007 at 8:31 am

It seems incredible from here in the UK that so many people in "The Land of the Free" are still shackled by life-denying Iron Age superstitions. Thank God for the Washington Post! :o)

Keep up the good work Richard (and Daniel, Sam, et al.)

Other Comments by jeff_n

6. Comment #15553 by Sailnsouth on January 1, 2007 at 8:59 am

Yes, my feelings exactly. Hopefully the wider availability of these books will help all the fence-sitters out there to open their minds. Once people are more familiar with such ideas the general stigma towards athorism will fade.

At least in the USA, our recent midterm elections have shown that the tide is turning away from the religious right, hopefully in time to reverse the waning reputation our country has earned under the stewardship of GWB.

Please keep publishing Richard Dawkins the world needs your thoughts!

Other Comments by Sailnsouth

7. Comment #15554 by ICONIC FREEDOM on January 1, 2007 at 9:05 am

 avatarAs Mike Dickin said on his final broadcast referring to the number of phone calls about Richard's interview, "We are overwhelmed".

I utilize the same thought with regard to my own experience of Richard, Sam, Dan, and others, I am overwhelmed - additionally, enlightened, educated, inspired, and continue to garner information by which to reasonably debate this issue with the uninformed or ignorant when it comes to belief in religion along with it's dangerous precepts.

If possible, as many of you know, we have a huge issue regarding gay marriage in our country that is experiencing a lot of attention, I would be most appreciative of any ideas to further my debate about this issue with those of the religious persuasion.

Other Comments by ICONIC FREEDOM

8. Comment #15560 by CreatedAnAthiestByGod on January 1, 2007 at 9:53 am

If I knew Professor Anthony M Stevens-Arroyo I would keep an eye on him. Especially if I were part of a minority group! If he can be so casual in his Atheistophobia what other sub-section of society has he got it in for?

Other Comments by CreatedAnAthiestByGod

9. Comment #15569 by DV82XL on January 1, 2007 at 11:12 am

This is not going to be a passing vogue. I have had the privilege of living through the transition of my Provence (Quebec, Canada) from an effective Roman Catholic theocracy to a pluralistic secular state.

Those that did not live here before that change have difficulty believing some of the stories from that time, of paychecks being set first to the church to be cashed and then payed out by the priest (after taking the tithe), of elections controlled by demanding that ballots be shown before putting them into the box, and other abuses too numerous to list here.

The so-called Quiet Revolution broke the back of the Church's power BECAUSE there where so many that had lost faith, but were conforming outwardly due to fear, that once the first solid kicks hit this rotten structure, it fell swiftly apart.

We have gone in one generation from a culture that treated children born out of wedlock as sub-human (Google 'Duplessis Orphans' if you don't believe me) to the first jurisdiction in North America to legalize Gay marriage. Yes there was a linguistic component to this, but by in large this was a Trojan Horse for the real issue. I am a Francophone, (as you can tell from my poor English prose) and I can tell you that I had no trouble living in French before this happened.

RD has mentioned in the past the unwritten rule that demands that we 'show respect' to those with faith, even if we don't believe ourselves. This is the final barrier must be broken down, in the English speaking world at least, and you will see just how many will find their voice and how swiftly the political influence of the theists will melt away

Other Comments by DV82XL

10. Comment #15570 by DavidJMH on January 1, 2007 at 11:17 am

Dawkins of Darwinist bent
Causes so much theistic dissent.
They all cry "Enough
Of this blasphemous stuff",
But God remains predictably silent.

Other Comments by DavidJMH

11. Comment #15603 by marinemammal on January 1, 2007 at 2:33 pm

Why does Dr. Dawkins belittle his his writing skills? I do agree with him that there is a lot of pent up frustration among freethinkers, but I think that he and Sam and Daniel owe much of their success and the success of the "movement" to their calm, rational approach and their eloquent and memorable delivery.

Other Comments by marinemammal

12. Comment #15605 by Macho Nachos on January 1, 2007 at 2:59 pm

 avatarmarinemammal, I think he is just being modest. It's some combination of the 2 factors (something that needed to be said, and the way it was said) that made the books so successful.

Other Comments by Macho Nachos

13. Comment #15623 by Will in Aus on January 1, 2007 at 5:06 pm

 avatarI certainly don't think that atheism is a passing vogue. It can't be. We need it to be something that continues to grow. I'm trying to make my contribution, by lending my copy of The God Delusion or giving it as a gift, to people who are willing to read it.

Other Comments by Will in Aus

14. Comment #15634 by grolaw on January 1, 2007 at 6:20 pm

I always question certain authors and it is my experience that Christopher Hitchens is as likely to bite us in the ass as he is to provide some relevant information. I'd trade ten Christopher Hitchens for one Sam Harris.

I fear that Hitchens will simply give further ammunition to the deists because he is a jerk. Ask Sidney Blumenthal.

He did do a nice job illuminating the BS that Mother Theresa embraced- the best friend poverty ever had. But he has that nasty edge that serves to infuriate rather than illuminate - though the Good Dr. Dawkins has been accused of not tolerating fools well - Hitchens has a way of biting the hand that feeds him.

Time for a reality-based society in the USA is long past due - we are reveling rather than reviling the death of Saddam Hussein - wrapped in religious dogma more appropriate to the 1st Century than the 21st.

Other Comments by grolaw

15. Comment #15644 by markgreyam on January 1, 2007 at 7:58 pm

Stop! HAMMER TIME!

Seriously though, all puns aside, you really did hit the nail on the head here ...

Personally, I look forward to the day when someone can freely create a Jesus superhero character, much like the Thor of the Avengers.

Maybe he'll trick his enemies into drinking water that then makes them drunk, and weild a nail gun or something ...

Other Comments by markgreyam

16. Comment #15657 by Veronique on January 1, 2007 at 10:26 pm

 avatarSailnsouth - Comment 15553
Part of the turning tide may well have had to do with the independent assessments of Diebold's touch screen voting machines.
The assessments showed the vulnerability to infiltrate the integrity of the machines by viral infection codes that were capable of changing a voter's touch vote to Bush.
The other point made was that Diebold machine availability in known Democrat (often black) precincts were few, meaning that voters waiting up to 8 hours to vote simply fell out of the line and went home.
In other precincts known to be Republican (often white) the machines were far more numerous, meaning that votes were recorded from a far greater number of voters.
Having said that, well done you guys in the mid terms. Keep your wits about you for 2008.

Other Comments by Veronique

17. Comment #15755 by macronencer on January 2, 2007 at 2:06 pm

 avatarr.e. Comment #15569 by DV82XL:

Thank you for that very encouraging post! I have always rather liked the idea of moving to Canada. You've added to my interest in the idea. :)

(And by the way, I could not tell you were a Francophone, as your English was extremely good, up until you wrote "by in large" instead of "by and large" - but that's a mistake I've seen made by many who speak only English, so it would not have given it away!)

Other Comments by macronencer

18. Comment #15762 by John W on January 2, 2007 at 4:28 pm

I got your book The God Delusion as a Xmas present ( a nice little irony there). I was engrossed from page 1 but then I am a convert of some 40 plus years. I have also found and listened to the lecture that you gave in Lynchburg VA and the subsequent Q&A session.

When are you coming to Australia to help us disorganised atheists and agnostics get our act together by marketing your thinking which is so compelling? We have a government that is dominated by members of the God squad and this is a very worrying trend that mirrors what is happening in the USA. I suspect that the Australian public is also largely in the non-believer camp and again mirrors what your research has found in other Western democracies.

Other Comments by John W

19. Comment #15897 by happinessiseasy on January 3, 2007 at 3:01 pm

 avatarIt's articles like this that get me through the day. I work with stupid fundies who will argue with me any chance they get about the age of the earth, and will say asinine things like "Evolution has been disproven."

But every time I get my hopes up just a little, I bring myself back down to earth and realize that it will still take lots and lots of time for things to change.

Other Comments by happinessiseasy

20. Comment #16052 by Lionel A on January 4, 2007 at 9:39 am

 avatarI would like to read a copy of Dan Dennett's 'Breaking the Spell' but have not seen this one for sale yet in my local branch of the biggest national book chain and Hampshire County Council Library has only two copies for the whole of the county.

I think this is typical of libraries and bookshops in the UK on this and related topics.

I don't particularly like Amazon, keeping good book stores in town centres is becoming an issue, besides my comment elsewhere (in the 'Executing Saddam ...' thread) may provide another clue as to why I don't trust them.

I see that a paperback edition of 'Breaking the Spell' is due to be published March 2007.

Other Comments by Lionel A

21. Comment #16059 by StephenH on January 4, 2007 at 10:33 am

 avatarVery good writing as always from Richard.

He makes a critical point, something i feel strongly that Atheists should NOT remain respectfully silent about

The quote from Professor Anthony M Stevens-Arroyo about never meeting an atheist he could like.

As Richard describes, you substitute the word atheist above with 'democrat' 'labour supporter' 'black'. We would be hearing cries of Discrimination.

Of course it goes without saying that it is foolish to make such generalisations about entire catagories of people in the first place

We are simply talking here about people that find the Biblical 'God' just as fictional as the 'Thor' God or the 'Zeus' God

Unless we are still living in barbaric times, where Heretics were burned for not 'believing', i really don't see what the Crime is. Certainly Atheists should not be afraid to admit they are non-believers in public

Other Comments by StephenH

22. Comment #16118 by nine9s on January 4, 2007 at 4:44 pm

"People *need* Thor."

BWAAAAHAAAHAHAAAHA!!!

I love it!

Other Comments by nine9s

23. Comment #16123 by iluv2meditate on January 4, 2007 at 5:14 pm

On my recent book promotion tour of the USA, the standing ovations I consistently received from packed audiences around the country, (including in Kansas, and Lynchburg, Virginia as well as, more predictably, the so-called 'blue' states) owed nothing to any eloquence or writing skills of mine, and everything, I believe, to a pent-up frustration among reviled freethinkers.

I don't completely agree with RD here. He most certainly is an eloquent writer although his knowledge about theology and the history between religion & science is disappointingly inadequate to say the least. IMHO Science and spirituality can perfectly co-exist. One does not need to be an atheist to be rationale or scientific. Isaac Newton for example took his theology just an seriously as his study of physics. RD's theological research seems to focus on christianity, judaism and islam without commenting on several eastern philosophies like Buddhism, Hindusim etc. centered around self realization. Everyone has the right to be a believer or a non-believer but I see flaws in RD's arguments and reasonings in "the God Delusion" just as Horr pointed out.

Other Comments by iluv2meditate

24. Comment #16183 by Suffolk Blue on January 5, 2007 at 10:01 am

Interesting stuff. I often use the Norse & Greek & Roman gods as an argument. Let's hope that in a few years' time the middle eastern monotheistic gods will seem as absurd to everyone as the Zeus & Thor & Mercury & Venus & the rest do now.

Other Comments by Suffolk Blue

25. Comment #16188 by jeff_n on January 5, 2007 at 12:02 pm

When talking about theistic religions, I suggest we should try to use the term "mythology" as often as possible, as in "Christian mythology", "Judaic mythology" and "Islamic mythology". Perhaps that would go some way towards shifting the way these religions are perceived and help those who have never given it much thought to see that Christian, Judaic and Islamic stories of the supernatural are no different from similar stories found in Greek mythology, Norse mythology, etc. These are, of course, fascinating and worthwhile areas of study in their own right, but no one would even think of taking them literally because they are always associated with the term "mythology". We might even get some fundamentalists thinking... Maybe! :o)

Other Comments by jeff_n

26. Comment #16189 by Jonathan Dore on January 5, 2007 at 12:03 pm

Comment 23 by iluv2meditate

"He most certainly is an eloquent writer although his knowledge about theology and the history between religion & science is disappointingly inadequate to say the least."

Dawkins's reply when this was put to him by "Science & Theology News", following an interview with Alister McGrath, summarizes a point he must be weary of reiterating by now: "I have, of course, met this point before. It sounds superficially fair. But it presupposes that that there is something in Christian theology to be ignorant about. The entire thrust of my position is that Christian theology is a non-subject. It is empty. Vacuous. Devoid of coherence or content. I imagine that McGrath would join me in expressing disbelief in fairies, astrology and Thor's hammer. How would he respond if a fairyologist, astrologer or Viking accused him of ignorance of their respective subjects?" He goes on to say (I don't have the exact quote in front of me) that the only theological questions that there is an a priori reason to consider are those concerning the existence or non-existence of a god, or of the supernatural generally. But if these foundational arguments fail to convince, then the whole edifice of theology built upon them -- which simply *assume* god's existence -- is irrelevant and beside the point. These arguments for god's existence (Anselm, Aquinas, Paley etc.) are indeed what Dawkins discusses at some length in "The God Delusion"; if you've read it (and from your remarks I assume you have), please let us know what these flaws in argument and reasoning are that you find there.

Other Comments by Jonathan Dore

27. Comment #24618 by maton100 on March 7, 2007 at 3:48 pm

 avatarFrosty the Snowman contains several Christian motifs, is the story of a snowman who comes to life for a time, melts (dies) but also reassures his childlike followers that he will "be back again some day." The television special developed from this song invents the concept of Frosty being made from "Christmas snow" which entails that he can never completely melt away and thus has an eternal essence.

Other Comments by maton100

28. Comment #51432 by crabsallover on June 22, 2007 at 11:16 pm

 avatarVictor Stenger will give a talk ('God the failed hypothesis') to Dorset Humanists in Bournemouth, England on 31st August 2007 at 6pm. Details here: http://tinyurl.com/yr8ov7

If you want to attend contact Chris Street: http://tinyurl.com/25t3x3

We plan for Stenger to debate John Polkinghorne at this meeting (TBC).

More about Victor Stenger: http://tinyurl.com/27qx7x

About Polkinghorne: http://tinyurl.com/27p34y

Other Comments by crabsallover
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: