A Fundamentally stupid ‘smear’
A blogger over at the Economist gets in on the debate and calls out critics of the ‘new atheists’ for calling their atheism “fundamentalist.” Right on!
Finally, there is the bogus equivalent with atheist certainty and religious certainty. Yes, Answers in Genesis is certain that the world is 6,000 years old, and Richard Dawkins is certain that it isn’t. The fact is that only one of them is right, and I’m going to say it right here: it’s Mr Dawkins. There is a difference—call it a fundamental one—between being certain and wrong and being certain and right.
Patrick Appel a blogger filling in at Andrew Sullivan’s blog has been letting readers comment on all these issues and he’s weighed in a bit himself. He pointed me to the Economist blog piece; his own response is to point out:
Atheism as fundamentalism in reverse might not be a very helpful label, but recognition that we are all vulnerable to cognitive biases is worth pointing out.
Sure, that’s true, but who disagrees? Do the “New Atheists?” Ummm… no. That’s really one of their messages – we all can be irrational so we need science and secular reason to guide us as humans. Faith, even from moderates, is not a proper basis to judge reality.
[Update: RichardDawkins.net posted the Economist blog post I sent them… and thanked me! Check it out.]