Examining the idea of the Fundamentalist Atheist
“Atheism is a religion & you’re as bad as the fundamentalists”
This is the title of a topic of discussion† at the website of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science & Reason. It is a curious & interesting idea that many theists & agnostics have used as a debate-clincher against atheists. It works on the principle of the seemingly parallel fanaticism witnessed in religious & non-religious extremism.
The first point of argument against such a statement would be defining the difference between religious fanaticism & scientific enthusiasm, but passionate belief in religion & passionate belief in the non-existence of religious-faith is too bleak a line to be used as a proper distinguishing factor.
It is therefore vital to dig deeper & identify the most basic rules for religiosity & atheism & compare the difference found therein.
A religious person (irrespective of the particular religion he/she follows) will be seen to agree with most, if not all, of the following rudimentary rules of worship –
On the other hand, a similar checklist for atheists would consist only of –
There are other similarities to be found ofcourse… One may discover that a significant percentage of atheists are better-educated in the fields of science & logistics, or maybe that atheists are more inclined towards literature & the arts? Perhaps atheists as a rule are exceptionally well read in the works of Richard Dawkins & Christopher Hitchens!
But as I shall explain, these are all coincidental or logical side-effects of a common lack of belief, not some higher set of cosmic rules that must be obeyed in order to be an atheist.
Religious studies inevitably wedge themselves against science & therefore an atheist has a better chance at understanding a scientific hypothesis than someone convinced the world is only about 10,000 years old. Similarly, religious restrictions & condemnations may hamper the availability of certain types of literature or music or films to its believers & therefore an atheist may have the upper hand in choosing whatever he/she likes solely on his/her own volition.
In the same way, atheists may in general find the thoughts & musings of fellow-atheists an enjoyable read, but such readings are recommendations, not requirements. A non-believer that has never heard of Bertrand Russell or Daniel Dennett will never be prejudiced against by another atheist who is intimate with those particular authors.
The final point of distinction however is that all atheists, however passionate they may seem about defending the rights of science & reason… will never take their arguments to the level of fanaticism religious-minded people have shown throughout history. From the days of the purging of the Pagans by the newly formed Christians, to the Crusades & the Inquisition, to the modern day Holy Jihads… all acts of indescribable cruelty carried out because of a sense of belief that it was willed by God.
An atheist will never want to “force” his/her belief in the non-existence of God onto a believer because atheism is a transition that comes off natural understanding & personal examination of the facts of religion & science. If someone after knowing everything that science has to offer still chooses to believe in religion & God, then no atheist will care to “convert” said individual.
Atheism is different from religion in that it is a conclusion that someone will reach, a choice that does not claim to be anything more than the facts supporting it & a distinction-free word for non-believers who may have nothing more in common.
In conclusion, the idea of a fundamentalist atheist is a flawed one because there is no unifying center that would radicalize an atheist to the extent of a fundamentalist. There is no sense of communal God, no eternal paradise full of raisins, no hierarchy of greater-atheists whose commands must be obeyed…
Atheism is a state of being unguided by make-believe shepherds & understanding the real nature of life, the Universe & Everything.
†"Atheism is a Religion"
Authors Mentioned:
Richard Dawkins - The God Delusion
Christopher Hitchens - God is Not Great
Bertrand Russell - Why I Am Not A Christian
Daniel C. Dennett - Breaking the Spell
This is the title of a topic of discussion† at the website of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science & Reason. It is a curious & interesting idea that many theists & agnostics have used as a debate-clincher against atheists. It works on the principle of the seemingly parallel fanaticism witnessed in religious & non-religious extremism.
The first point of argument against such a statement would be defining the difference between religious fanaticism & scientific enthusiasm, but passionate belief in religion & passionate belief in the non-existence of religious-faith is too bleak a line to be used as a proper distinguishing factor.
It is therefore vital to dig deeper & identify the most basic rules for religiosity & atheism & compare the difference found therein.
A religious person (irrespective of the particular religion he/she follows) will be seen to agree with most, if not all, of the following rudimentary rules of worship –
- A belief in a creator/God-being that is omnipotent & omniscient.
- A belief that said God-being is actively keeping tabs on the good & evil acts committed by the believer.
- A belief that said good & evil acts are defined by the God-being through some form of holy scripture that is interpreted by a hierarchy of believers claiming to be better connected to said God-being than the ordinary believer.
- A belief in an afterlife & a further belief that the level of the eternal accommodation received depends on the divine evaluation of the aforementioned good & evil acts committed by the believer during his/her life.
On the other hand, a similar checklist for atheists would consist only of –
- Does not believe in a creator/God-being.
There are other similarities to be found ofcourse… One may discover that a significant percentage of atheists are better-educated in the fields of science & logistics, or maybe that atheists are more inclined towards literature & the arts? Perhaps atheists as a rule are exceptionally well read in the works of Richard Dawkins & Christopher Hitchens!
But as I shall explain, these are all coincidental or logical side-effects of a common lack of belief, not some higher set of cosmic rules that must be obeyed in order to be an atheist.
Religious studies inevitably wedge themselves against science & therefore an atheist has a better chance at understanding a scientific hypothesis than someone convinced the world is only about 10,000 years old. Similarly, religious restrictions & condemnations may hamper the availability of certain types of literature or music or films to its believers & therefore an atheist may have the upper hand in choosing whatever he/she likes solely on his/her own volition.
In the same way, atheists may in general find the thoughts & musings of fellow-atheists an enjoyable read, but such readings are recommendations, not requirements. A non-believer that has never heard of Bertrand Russell or Daniel Dennett will never be prejudiced against by another atheist who is intimate with those particular authors.
The final point of distinction however is that all atheists, however passionate they may seem about defending the rights of science & reason… will never take their arguments to the level of fanaticism religious-minded people have shown throughout history. From the days of the purging of the Pagans by the newly formed Christians, to the Crusades & the Inquisition, to the modern day Holy Jihads… all acts of indescribable cruelty carried out because of a sense of belief that it was willed by God.
An atheist will never want to “force” his/her belief in the non-existence of God onto a believer because atheism is a transition that comes off natural understanding & personal examination of the facts of religion & science. If someone after knowing everything that science has to offer still chooses to believe in religion & God, then no atheist will care to “convert” said individual.
Atheism is different from religion in that it is a conclusion that someone will reach, a choice that does not claim to be anything more than the facts supporting it & a distinction-free word for non-believers who may have nothing more in common.
In conclusion, the idea of a fundamentalist atheist is a flawed one because there is no unifying center that would radicalize an atheist to the extent of a fundamentalist. There is no sense of communal God, no eternal paradise full of raisins, no hierarchy of greater-atheists whose commands must be obeyed…
Atheism is a state of being unguided by make-believe shepherds & understanding the real nature of life, the Universe & Everything.
†"Atheism is a Religion"
Authors Mentioned:
Richard Dawkins - The God Delusion
Christopher Hitchens - God is Not Great
Bertrand Russell - Why I Am Not A Christian
Daniel C. Dennett - Breaking the Spell
