Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Why do militant atheists hate other atheists?
I just happened across an article online, and discovered that Max Tegmark (a self-described atheist who works at MIT) has been attacked by militant atheists with far more frequency than religious fundamentalists (which surprised him, according to the article). The URL to the article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-tegmark/angry-at...
And to the survey about the US minority population of anti-evolutionists:
http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/religion.html
So... why would militant atheists attack someone who might actually have proof of something that they are claiming, and who is actually on their side?
Doesn't this hurt atheism, to do things like this?
I'm actually confused on this. Could someone illuminate the situation a little more clearly? Best answer goes to those who are able to give me a well-reasoned and well-supported answer which doesn't troll. Trolls should not expect a 'best answer' or much in the way of interaction.
As a philosophical position, atheism could very much stand to be hurt. I did not mean to imply that there was a central atheist organization or anything.
CC: Choosing a lack of a position is still a philosophical position...it's a choice to abstain, rather than a choice to participate.
The way it would do harm is by convincing people that they don't want to be associated with other "hotheads who shoot their mouths off" and the hatred would naturally cause people to entrench in their own beliefs, rather than seeking reason, wouldn't it? So why are they hating on someone who really kinda supports their position?
CC: Your response leads to another question: Don't you think that these "hotheads" would naturally weaken the argument in favor of atheism?
(Please treat this as a Critical Thinking exercise... this is not merely a reactionary question; it's something I've been thinking about since the article came out.)
CC: Thanks for engaging in reason! The argument is (speaking in the most general terms): "The majority is wrong; there is no deity, on the basis of lacking proof. We should instead seek reason and demonstrate evidence for what we believe." This is the "party line" for almost every atheist I have ever heard speak, to explain their philosophical position(s). It honestly has the appearance of a "core tenet of faith" for a religion of reason, rather than strictly being absent of any kind of faith.
But it doesn't really address the core of the question: why would these atheists attack someone who actually supports their philosophical position?
Thank you, CC! I will consider this your 'final answer' as it does actually now address the main points of the question. I really appreciate the clarification you offered, as it does bring the issue of what atheism actually is into my mind a little more clearly. It is clear to me that the hotheads are one ilk, while the ones I speak to are generally well-educated and thinking individuals, and of another ilk entirely.
I will be asking another question soon about atheism. I would enjoy your response to that one as well. :)
2 Answers
- SillypantsLv 78 years agoFavorite Answer
I'll take a look at the info and try to answer further if I can. Interesting. But to answer "does this hurt atheism" the answer is "No" because there is no organized atheism.
No atheists represent me in the way a Catholic might represent Catholicism or a Buddhist might represent Buddhism.
...
I read the HP article and here's the answer to your question "why would they attack?":
"I'm obviously not implying that all anti-religious people are mean-spirited or intolerant. However, I can't help being struck by how some people on both the religious and anti-religious extremes of the spectrum share disturbing similarities in debating style."
He explains it: There are some hotheads who simply didn't read the information and just shot their mouths off. That's people for you. Get rid of them, you will have a trace leftover number of truly anti-theists (what you call "militant") who are outnumbered by fundamentalists.
Your main title question (maybe asked for shock value) is not valid according to the supporting article.
And no, it's not hurtful to atheism which is simply "without a belief in gods" and not a philosophy of any kind and not really a true position. It's lack of a position. People confuse that with agnosticism. People who claim they are agnostic say they cannot know so there is no point in attempting to try. Atheists simply say, "I'm without belief" and it ends there as to whether or not they think they can know.
...
ps. I have been attacked by fellow atheists here at Y!A for two very distinct reasons:
1. They are morons with poor reasoning skills. They are nowhere near MIT level intellect.
2. They didn't read my question or comment for true comprehension and just shot their mouths off.
...
Ok. that's a fair point about position. But it's not harmful for atheism. It's just a lack of belief in god. How does it harm atheism? It doesn't. Because some people are hothead morons? No. Some people are hothead morons about the cars they prefer. It doesn't hurt the cars. And I harken back to "there is no organized atheism". So how one moron behaves doesn't reflect on me or the lack of belief in gods.
...
I'm trying to say though, there is no organized atheism. There are no tenets or rules or ways-to-live-by. When theists pull Pol Pot out, they are really pulling out political dogma, not atheists. That's something theists have difficulty in understanding. There are hothead morons who don't believe in murder. I don't then say, "I don't want to be associated with a hot head who doesn't believe in murder. I will look into murder." Not believing in murder is just without a belief in murder, not an organized thing that dictates how those people should live their lives or behave otherwise.
...
Ok, your question begs the question, "What is the argument for atheism?"
(By the way, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I really critically think the question is necessary) ;)
...
You're welcome. It's a rarity to have a good classical argument on Y!A.
1. "The argument for atheism" is where our miscommunication is coming from. There is no "atheist party line". Atheism is just without a belief in a god or gods. There are some atheists with poor reasoning skills who do go deeper and confuse the situation with further individual opinions. Their opinions are individual ego identity, not atheism. And there are atheists who don't know much about science and would prefer to live in a world of art and music and philosophy (I'm not slamming that). To agree that these atheists have unfairly confused you, I have asked the question here to atheists to clarify that there is a difference between saying "I don't believe" and "There is NO god". But! So many atheists did NOT see the difference, it was shocking. I was disappointed in being reminded that being atheist doesn't mean anything other than lack of belief, and that includes INTELLIGENCE. ;) Just because you don't believe in any gods, ****doesn't make you rational or smart!!!*** and that is a lesson to me, too. You are reasonable in your confusion and I hope I have cleared that up for you.
2. Honestly , I thought I answered your question about attack: 1. Being atheist doesn't mean anything other than lack of belief and can mean you're still an idiot* who believes totally different things from me in all other areas of life and 2. They just didn't read what they attacked.
* I don't mean "idiot" arrogantly, not by virtue that I disagree, I mean "idiot" by virtue of not having good reasoning skills. I disagree wit you on things, but I think you have good reasoning skills.
Source(s): You're welcome. This was fun. If it's posted soon I'll take a look. :) I have to stop now anyway, since my answer is now officially "too long". haha - Anonymous8 years ago
I call Bullsh!t.
