Destroying Religion

[Living in the Light]

I've learned that this is the goal of New Atheism. But how could this be accomplished? How could religion be systematically dismantled and destroyed, if in fact that is possible?

Hasn't this already been tried with the old "cold war" regimes such as the USSR and other Eastern European regimes?

When will people ever learn -- man cannot destroy God.

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

I've learned that this is the goal of New Atheism. But how could this be accomplished? How could religion be systematically dismantled and destroyed, if in fact that is possible?

Hasn't this already been tried with the old "cold war" regimes such as the USSR and other Eastern European regimes?

When will people ever learn -- man cannot destroy God.

I agree.
You cannot destroy that which does not exist.
Religion on the other hand, is dying a swift death to 'spiritualism' though.
(If you ask me, that's almost as bad but at least it does not seem to include as many dogma's.)

 

[GrowingSmaller]

You mean like those charities who in the name of god will actually refuse to give you aid unless you convert to their religion and if you refuse to play along they take their soup cans elsewhere and the needy be damned?

I guess that would be up the to individual.

No - what I mean is people whose charity is religiously motivated, and in the absence of their faith they would not be so charitable. Would a new atheist benificiary actually decline help* unless the giver were non-religious in their motivation? This is about conditional charity on the grounds that people convert, but for example faith groups giving homeless people assistance whatever their beliefs.

*on the grounds that he ought to combat the influence of faith through reason, wherever it surfaces.

 

[quatona]

No - what I mean is people whose charity is religiously motivated, and in the absence of their faith they would not be so charitable.

So what do you think is the percentage of Christians whose charity is not motivated by empathy but "religiously motivated" (whatever that might mean, exactly)?

 

[Theofane]

It isn't the goal of the New Atheists to "destroy" religion, but to rationally enlighten people so that they change their minds and become atheists.

Consider this Wikipedia quote, which seems accurate to me.

New Atheism is the name given to a movement among some 21st-century atheist writers who have advocated the view that "religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Rational argument isn't gonna cut it.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Rational argument isn't gonna cut it.

I agree. Many people aren't open to reason. Religion will be with humanity for a very long time.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[The Paul]

...and in the absence of their faith they would not be so charitable...

I expect that, for the most part, the sort of person who is in a position to receive charity doesn't care at all about your personal conviction that charity is a religious phenomenon.

 

[KCfromNC]

What about homeless new atheists.... Do they turn down charity given in the name of God?

If they do they're not Real New Atheists (tm).

Speaking of which, what is a New Atheist anyway?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Speaking of which, what is a New Atheist anyway?

Not an Old Atheist.

But presumably this is a New Atheist.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Theofane]

If they do they're not Real New Atheists (tm).

Speaking of which, what is a New Atheist anyway?

An atheist fundamentalist.

Why ask questions to which you already know the answers?

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

An atheist fundamentalist.

Why ask questions to which you already know the answers?

This is news to me. What do you think those fundamentals are?

 

[variant]

That is an old forum trick.

Don't try to derail this thread!

Asking you to support your baseless, unfounded, and insulting assertions is not a thread derail.

I don't particularly like religion but I believe in your freedom to think what you like and worship what you please, just don't ask me to encourage or play along.

 

[Svt4Him]

That is an old forum trick.

Don't try to derail this thread!

Actually he's correct in asking but what you're doing is shifting the burden of proof, among other things. You make a claim, you back it up, basic logic and debate techniques.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

So what do you think is the percentage of Christians whose charity is not motivated by empathy but "religiously motivated" (whatever that might mean, exactly)?

I would say smaller than those motivated by empathy and religion. I do not have exact stats. Anyway if you are religious it does not mean you have to abandon empathy, but it is more likely that you would give empathy a religious interpretation, just like some hunter gatherers gave totemic animals a religious significance.

 

[quatona]

Anyway if you are religious it does not mean you have to abandon empathy, but it is more likely that you would give empathy a religious interpretation

Yup, that´s what I was getting at: empathic persons tend to give (their motivation is empathy), and they rationalize it according to whatever worldview they hold.
Thus, I think "religiously motivated" is a misleading term here.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Yup, that´s what I was getting at: empathic persons tend to give (their motivation is empathy), and they rationalize it according to whatever worldview they hold.
Thus, I think "religiously motivated" is a misleading term here.

I see. However I do think that religion can influence charitability. For instance the "missions" in my area which provide food and clothing for the poor are all religiously based. I have yet to see a secular mission. Also I have been part of a humanist circle, and whilst they collected money for humanist causes they never collected for the poor. (Also I remember that one humanist was a fundraiser for charity, and she said that demographically religious people were the biggest givers). On the other hand local churches have donation boxes especially for helping the poor. Before the appearance of the welfare state a lot more social service was provided by Christian institutions. I think that the gospel message of charity and care for the downtrodden has something to do with this - it is not something which can be taken for granted. There may perhaps be a secular substitute for the message, but that does not make it causally inert.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I think its a myth that you can abandon religion and not change the social order for good or for bad. Just look at divorce rates.

 

[The Nihilist]

I think its a myth that you can abandon religion and not change the social order for good or for bad. Just look at divorce rates.

Conservative christians have a higher rate of divorce than atheists
U.S. divorce rates: for various faith groups, age groups and geographical areas

 

[KCfromNC]

Conservative christians have a higher rate of divorce than atheists
U.S. divorce rates: for various faith groups, age groups and geographical areas

Yep, as he said divorce rates would go down if we eliminated religious conservatives. Obviously - look at the conservative Presidential candidates left. They average two wives per candidate. And that's even without making jokes about polygamy.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Ok if thats the case then that the case, but it still apparently shows that faith (or lack of it) can influence behavior - be it charity, or in this case divorce rates.