Criticism of atheism wikipedia page ( I disagree with said criticisms mentioned in the article)

Criticism of atheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Atheism
The Greek word "atheoi" ("[those who are] without God") as it appears on the early 3rd-century Papyrus 46
Concepts
Antitheism·
 Atheism and religion·
 Criticism of atheism·
 Implicit and explicit atheism·
 Negative and positive atheism·
 Christian atheism·
 Jewish atheism·
 Hindu atheism
 
History
History of atheism·
 New Atheism·
 State atheism
 
Arguments for atheism
Arguments against God's existence·
 Argument from free will·
 Argument from inconsistent revelations·
 Argument from nonbelief·
 Hitchens' razor·
 Argument from poor design·
 Atheist's Wager·
 Fate of the unlearned·
 God of the gaps·
 Incompatible-properties argument·
 Omnipotence paradox·
 Problem of evil·
 Problem of Hell·
 Russell's teapot·
 Theological noncognitivism·
 Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit
 
People
Demographics·
 Discrimination / persecution of atheists·
 Notable atheists
 
Related concepts

Agnosticism [show]
·
·
·
·
·
·

Irreligion [show]
·
·
·
·
·
·

Naturalism [show]
·
·
·

Secularism [show]
·
·
·

Portal icon Atheism portal
WikiProject

v·
 t·
 e
   
Main article: Atheism
Criticism of atheism is criticism of the concepts, validity, or impact of atheism, including associated political and social implications. Criticism of atheism is complicated by the fact that there exist multiple definitions and concepts of atheism (and little consensus among fellow atheists), including practical atheism, theoretical atheism, negative and positive atheism, implicit and explicit atheism, and strong and weak atheism, with critics not always specifying the subset of atheism being criticized.
Criticism includes arguments based on theistic positions, and arguments pertaining to morality or what are thought to be the effects of atheism on the individual.

Contents
  [hide] 1 Definitions and concepts of atheism
2 Atheism and the individual
3 Morality
4 Atheism as faith
5 Catholic perspective
6 Historical criticism
7 Atheism and politics
8 Atheism and science
9 New Atheism
10 See also
11 References
Definitions and concepts of atheism[edit]
Atheism is the absence of belief that any deities exist,[1][2] the position that there are no deities,[3] or the rejection of belief in the existence of deities,[4]
Atheists cite a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities.[5] Rationales for not believing in any deity include the problem of evil, the argument from inconsistent revelations, and the argument from nonbelief. Other arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. In general, atheists regard the arguments for the existence of God as unconvincing or flawed.[6]
Agnostic atheists contend that there are insufficient grounds for strong atheism, the position that no deities exist,[7] but at the same time believe that there are insufficient grounds for belief in deities.
Ignostics propose that every other theological position (including agnosticism and atheism) assumes too much about the concept of God and that the question of the existence of God is meaningless.
Atheism and the individual[edit]



Blaise Pascal first explained his wager in Pensées (1669)
In his Pensées, Blaise Pascal criticizes atheists for not seeing signs of God's will.[8] He also formulated Pascal's Wager, which posits that there is more to be gained from wagering on the existence of God than from atheism, and that a rational person should live as though God exists, even though the truth of the matter cannot actually be known. Criticism of Pascal's Wager began in his own day, and came from both staunch atheists and the religious orthodoxy. A common objection to Pascal's wager was noted by Voltaire, a Deist, known as the argument from inconsistent revelations. Voltaire rejected the notion that the wager was 'proof of god' as "indecent and childish", adding, "the interest I have to believe a thing is no proof that such a thing exists."[9]
An article in the American Journal of Psychiatry in 2004 suggested that atheists might have a higher suicide rate than theists.[10] According to William Bainbridge, atheism is common among people whose social obligations are weak and is also connected to lower fertility rates in some industrial nations.[11] Extended length of sobriety in alcohol recovery is related positively to higher levels of theistic belief, active community helping, and self-transcendence.[12] Some studies state that in developed countries, health, life expectancy, and other correlates of wealth, tend to be statistical predictors of a greater percentage of atheists, compared to countries with higher proportions of believers.[13][14] Multiple methodological problems have been identified with cross-national assessments of religiosity, secularity, and social health which undermine conclusive statements on religiosity and secularity in developed democracies.[15]

Morality[edit]
See also: Morality without religion, Euthyphro dilemma, and Divine command theory
The Catholic Church believes that morality is ensured through natural law but that religion provides a more solid foundation.[16] For many years in the United States, atheists were not allowed to testify in court because it was believed that an atheist would have no reason to tell the truth (see also discrimination against atheists).[17]
Atheists such as biologist and popular author Richard Dawkins have proposed that human morality is a result of evolutionary, sociobiological history. He proposes that the "moral zeitgeist" helps describe how moral imperatives and values naturalistically evolve over time from biological and cultural origins.[18]
Critics assert that natural law provides a foundation on which people may build moral rules to guide their choices and regulate society, but does not provide as strong a basis for moral behavior as a morality that is based in religion.[19] Douglas Wilson, an evangelical theologian, argues that while atheists can behave morally, belief is necessary for an individual "to give a rational and coherent account" of why they are obligated to lead a morally responsible life.[20] Wilson says that atheism is unable to "give an account of why one deed should be seen as good and another as evil" (emphasis in original).[21] Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, outgoing Archbishop of Westminster, expressed this position by describing a lack of faith as “the greatest of evils” and blamed atheism for war and destruction, implying that it was a "greater evil even than sin itself."[22]
Atheism as faith[edit]
Further information: Secular religion and nontheistic religions
Another criticism of atheism is that it is a faith in itself, as a belief in its own right, with a certainty about the falseness of religious beliefs that is comparable to the certainty about the unknown that is practiced by religions.[23] Journalist Rod Liddle and theologian Aliester McGrath assert that some atheists are dogmatic.[24][25]
In a study on American secularity, Frank Pasquale notes that some tensions do exist among secular groups where, for instance, atheists are sometimes viewed as "fundamentalists" by secular humanists.[26]
In his book First Principles (1862), the 19th-century English philosopher and sociologist Herbert Spencer wrote that, as regards the origin of the universe, three hypotheses are possible: self-existence (atheism), self-creation (pantheism), or creation by an external agency (theism).[27] Spencer argued that it is "impossible to avoid making the assumption of self-existence" in any of the three hypotheses,[28] and concluded that "even positive Atheism comes within the definition" of religion.[29]
Talal Asad, in an anthropological study on modernity, quotes an Arab atheist named Adonis who has said, "The sacred for atheism is the human being himself, the human being of reason, and there is nothing greater than this human being. It replaces revelation by reason and God with humanity." To which Asad points out, "But an atheism that deifies Man is, ironically, close to the doctrine of the incarnation."[30]
Michael Martin and Paul Edwards have responded to criticism-as-faith by emphasizing that atheism can be the rejection of belief, or absence of belief.[31][32] Don Hirschberg once famously said "calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."[33]
Catholic perspective[edit]
The Catechism of the Catholic Church identifies atheism as a violation of the First Commandment, calling it "a sin against the virtue of religion". The catechism is careful to acknowledge that atheism may be motivated by virtuous or moral considerations, and admonishes Catholic Christians to focus on their own role in encouraging atheism by their religious or moral shortcomings:
(2125) [...] The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion.[34]
Historical criticism[edit]
The Bible has criticized atheism by stating "The fool has said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that does good." (Psalm 14:1). Francis Bacon in his essay On Atheism criticized the dispositions towards atheism as being "contrary to wisdom and moral gravity" and being associated with fearing government or public affairs. [35] He also stated that knowing a little science may lead one to atheism, but knowing more science will lead one to religion. [35] In another work called The Advancement of Learning, Bacon stated that superficial knowledge of philosophy inclines one to atheism while more knowledge of philosophy inclines one toward religion. [35]
Atheism and politics[edit]
See also: Persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union and Religious views of Adolf Hitler
Pope Benedict XVI has spoken out against atheism, stating in 2010:

Even in our own lifetime, we can recall how Britain and her leaders stood against a Nazi tyranny that wished to eradicate God from society and denied our common humanity to many, especially the Jews, who were thought unfit to live. I also recall the regime’s attitude to Christian pastors and religious who spoke the truth in love, opposed the Nazis and paid for that opposition with their lives. As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the twentieth century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a “reductive vision of the person and his destiny” "[36]
In response Richard Dawkins pointed out that Hitler was a member of the Roman Catholic church and stated, "Hitler certainly was not an atheist. In 1933 he claimed to have "stamped atheism out", having banned most of Germany's atheist organisations, including the German Freethinkers League whose building was then turned into an information bureau for church affairs."[37] In public, Hitler had made public speeches affirming his belief in Christianity.[38]
Some researches suggest that atheists are more numerous in peaceful nations than they are in turbulent or warlike ones, but causality of this trend is not clear and there are many outliers.[39] However, opponents of this view cite examples such as the Bolsheviks (in Soviet Russia) who were inspired by "an ideological creed which professed that all religion would atrophy ... resolved to eradicate Christianity as such".[40] In 1918 "[t]en Orthodox hierarchs were summarily shot" and "[c]hildren were deprived of any religious education outside the home."[40] Increasingly draconian measures were employed. In addition to direct state persecution, the League of the Militant Godless was founded in 1925, churches were closed and vandalized and "by 1938 eighty bishops had lost their lives, while thousands of clerics were sent to labour camps."[41]
In 1967, Enver Hoxha's regime conducted a campaign to extinguish religious life in Albania; by year's end over two thousand religious buildings were closed or converted to other uses, and religious leaders were imprisoned and executed. Albania was declared to be the world's first atheist country by its leaders, and Article 37 of the Albanian constitution of 1976 stated that "The State recognises no religion, and supports and carries out atheistic propaganda in order to implant a scientific materialistic world outlook in people."[42][43]
Evangelical Christian writer Dinesh D'Souza writes that "The crimes of atheism have generally been perpetrated through a hubristic ideology that sees man, not God, as the creator of values. Using the latest techniques of science and technology, man seeks to displace God and create a secular utopia here on earth."[44] He also contends:

And who can deny that Stalin and Mao, not to mention Pol Pot and a host of others, all committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was explicitly atheistic? Who can dispute that they did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a 'new man' and a religion-free utopia? These were mass murders performed with atheism as a central part of their ideological inspiration, they were not mass murders done by people who simply happened to be atheist.[45]
In response to this line of criticism, Sam Harris wrote:

The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.[46]
Richard Dawkins has stated that Stalin's atrocities were influenced not by atheism but by dogmatic Marxism,[18] and concludes that while Stalin and Mao happened to be atheists, they did not do their deeds in the name of atheism.[47] On other occasions, Dawkins has replied to the argument that Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin were antireligious with the response that Hitler and Stalin also grew moustaches, in an effort to show the argument as fallacious.[48] Instead, Dawkins argues in The God Delusion that "What matters is not whether Hitler and Stalin were atheists, but whether atheism systematically influences people to do bad things. There is not the smallest evidence that it does."[49] D'Souza responds that an individual need not explicitly invoke atheism in committing atrocities if it is already implied in his worldview, as is the case in Marxism.[45]
Theodore Beale has argued that approximately 148 million people were killed from 1917 to 2007, which is three times more than the deaths from war and individual crimes in the whole 20th century, by governments headed by leaders who were atheists.[50]
Atheism and science[edit]
Sociologist Steve Fuller wrote that "...Atheism as a positive doctrine has done precious little for science." He notes, "More generally, Atheism has not figured as a force in the history of science not because it has been suppressed but because whenever it has been expressed, it has not specifically encouraged the pursuit of science."[51] Early modern atheism developed in the 17th century, and Winfried Schroeder, a scholar of atheism, noted that science during this time did not strengthen the case for atheism.[52] In the 18th century, Denis Diderot argued that atheism was less scientific than metaphysics.[52] However, since the 19th century, both atheists and theists have said that science supports their worldviews.[52] Historian of science John Henry has noted that before the 19th century, science was generally cited to support many theological positions. However, materialist theories in natural philosophy became more prominent from the 17th century onwards, giving more room for atheism to develop. Since the 19th century, science has been employed in both theistic and atheistic cultures, depending on the prevailing popular beliefs.[53]
New Atheism[edit]
Journalist Robert Wright has argued that some New Atheists discourage looking for deeper root causes of conflicts when they assume that religion is the sole root of the problem. Wright argues that this can discourage people from working to change the circumstances that actually give rise to those conflicts.[54] Mark Chaves has said that the New Atheists, amongst others who comment on religions, have committed the religious congruence fallacy in their writings, by assuming that beliefs and practices remain static and coherent through time. He believes that the late Christopher Hitchens committed this error by assuming that the drive for congruence is a defining feature of religion, and that Dennett has done it by overlooking the fact that religious actions are dependent on the situation, just like other actions.[55]
Professor of Anthropology and Sociology Jack David Eller believes that the four principal New Atheist authors (Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris) do not offer anything new in terms of arguments to disprove the existence of gods. He also criticizes them for their focus on the dangers of theism, as opposed to the falsifying of theism, which results in mischaracterizing religions; taking local theisms as the essence of religion itself, and for focusing on the negative aspects of religion in the form of an "argument from benefit" in the reverse.[56]
Professors of philosophy and religion, Jeffrey Robbins and Christopher Rodkey, take issue with "the evangelical nature of the new atheism, which assumes that it has a Good News to share, at all cost, for the ultimate future of humanity by the conversion of as many people as possible." They find similarities between the new atheism and evangelical Christianity and conclude that the all-consuming nature of both "encourages endless conflict without progress" between both extremities.[57] Sociologist William Stahl notes "What is striking about the current debate is the frequency with which the New Atheists are portrayed as mirror images of religious fundamentalists." He discusses where both have "structural and epistemological parallels" and argues that "both the New Atheism and fundamentalism are attempts to recreate authority in the face of crises of meaning in late modernity."[58]
See also[edit]

Portal icon Atheism portal
Conflict thesis
Implicit and explicit atheism
List of former atheists and agnostics
Myth of Progress
Nontheistic religions
State atheism
The Rage Against God
The Twilight of Atheism
There are no atheists in foxholes
Weak and strong atheism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Simon Blackburn, ed. (2008). "atheism". The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (2008 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved 2011-12-05. "Either the lack of belief that there exists a god, or the belief that there exists none."
2.Jump up ^ "atheism". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 2012-04-09.
3.Jump up ^ Rowe, William L. (1998). "Atheism". In Edward Craig. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-07310-3. Retrieved 2011-04-09. "atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. Another meaning of "atheism" is simply nonbelief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God. ...an atheist, in the broader sense of the term, is someone who disbelieves in every form of deity, not just the God of traditional Western theology."
4.Jump up ^ *Nielsen, Kai (2011). "Atheism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 2011-12-06. "for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God... because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers... because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance—e.g., "God" is just another name for love, or ... a symbolic term for moral ideals." Edwards, Paul (2005) [1967]. "Atheism". In Donald M. Borchert. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). MacMillan Reference USA (Gale). p. 359. ISBN 978-0-02-865780-6. "an 'atheist' is a person who rejects belief in God, regardless of whether or not his reason for the rejection is the claim that 'God exists' expresses a false proposition. People frequently adopt an attitude of rejection toward a position for reasons other than that it is a false proposition. It is common among contemporary philosophers, and indeed it was not uncommon in earlier centuries, to reject positions on the ground that they are meaningless. Sometimes, too, a theory is rejected on such grounds as that it is sterile or redundant or capricious, and there are many other considerations which in certain contexts are generally agreed to constitute good grounds for rejecting an assertion."(page 175 in 1967 edition)
5.Jump up ^ Various authors. "Logical Arguments for Atheism". Internet Infidels, The Secular Web Library. Retrieved 2007-APR-09.
6.Jump up ^ See e.g. Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Ch.3: Bantam Books. ISBN 0-618-68000-4. and Harris, Sam (2005). The End of Faith. W.W. Norton. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
7.Jump up ^ Anthony Kenny What I Believe see esp. Ch. 3 "Why I am not an atheist"
8.Jump up ^ Pascal, Blaise; Ariew, Roger (2005). Pensées. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Co. p. 51. ISBN 978-0-87220-717-2. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
9.Jump up ^ Remarques sur les Pensees de Pascal XI
10.Jump up ^ PsychiatryOnline | American Journal of Psychiatry | Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt
11.Jump up ^ Bainbridge, William (2005). "Atheism". Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 1 (Article 2): 1–26.
12.Jump up ^ Zemore, SE; Kaskutas, LA (2004 May). "Helping, spirituality and Alcoholics Anonymous in recovery.". Journal of studies on alcohol 65 (3): 383–91. PMID 15222595.
13.Jump up ^ Paul, Gregory. 2002. The Secular Revolution of the West, Free Inquiry, Summer: 28–34
14.Jump up ^ Zuckerman, P. (2007). M. Martin, ed. [url=http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=tAeFipOVx4MC&oi=fnd&pg=PA11&ots=KhsfEfpZ0W&sig=CoVGalSuqtn9O1PDG8WNegDjTF8#v=snippet&f=false The Cambridge Companion to Atheism] (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 58. ISBN 0-521-84270-0. "In sum, with the exception of suicide, countries marked by high rates of organic atheism are among the most societally healthy on earth, while societies characterized by nonexistent rates of organic atheism are among the most unhealthy. Of course, none of the above correlations demonstrate that high levels of organic atheism cause societal health or that low levels of organic atheism cause societal ills. Rather, societal health seems to cause widespread atheism, and societal insecurity seems to cause widespread belief in God, as has been demonstrated by Norris and Inglehart (2004), mentioned above."
15.Jump up ^ Moreno-Riaño, Gerson; Smith, Mark Caleb; Mach, Thomas (2006). "Religiosity, Secularism, and Social Health". Journal of Religion and Society (Cedarville University) 8.
16.Jump up ^ Josef Cardinal Ratzinger, Marcello Pera, "Without Roots: The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam" (Basic Books, 0465006345, 2006).
17.Jump up ^ See, e.g., United States v. Miller, 236 F. 798, 799 (W.D. Wash., N.D. 1916) (citing Thurston v. Whitney et al., 2 Cush. (Mass.) 104; Jones on Evidence, Blue Book, vol. 4, §§ 712, 713) ("Under the common-law rule a person who does not believe in a God who is the rewarder of truth and the avenger of falsehood cannot be permitted to testify.")
18.^ Jump up to: a b Dawkins, Richard (2006-09-18). The God Delusion. Ch. 7: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-0-618-68000-9. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
19.Jump up ^ "Where morality is divorced from religion, reason will, it is true, enable a man to recognize to a large extent the ideal to which his nature points. But much will be wanting. He will disregard some of his most essential duties. He will, further, be destitute of the strong motives for obedience to the law afforded by the sense of obligation to God and the knowledge of the tremendous sanction attached to its neglect – motives which experience has proved to be necessary as a safeguard against the influence of the passions. And, finally, his actions even if in accordance with the moral law, will be based not on the obligation imposed by the Divine will, but on considerations of human dignity and on the good of human society."Wikisource-logo.svg "Morality". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
20.Jump up ^ Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson, "Is Christianity Good for the World? Part 2"[dead link] Christianity Today magazine (web only, May 2007)
21.Jump up ^ Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson, "Is Christianity Good for the World? Part 6"[dead link] Christianity Today magazine (web only, May 2007)
22.Jump up ^ Gledhill, Ruth (May 22, 2009). "Archbishop of Westminster attacks atheism but says nothing on child abuse". The Times (London).[dead link]
23.Jump up ^ David Limbaugh, "Does atheism require more faith?," Townhall.com, April 20, 2004 Stanley Fish, "Atheism and Evidence," Think Again, The New York Times, June 17, 2007
DHRUV K. SINGHAL, "The Church of Atheism,", The Harvard Crimson, December 14, 2008
Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist," Crossway Books, March 01, 2004, 447 Pages, ISBN 1-58134-561-5
John F. Haught, God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens, Westminster John Knox Press, December 31, 2007, 156 pages, ISBN 978-0-664-23304-4, page 45
24.Jump up ^ Johns, Ian (2006). "Atheism gets a kick in the fundamentals". London: The Times.[dead link] Chater, David (2006). "Viewing guide: The Trouble with Atheism". London: The Times.[dead link]
Sam, Wollaston (2006-12-19). "Last night's TV". London: The Guardian.
25.Jump up ^ Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath, The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SPCK), February 15, 2007, ISBN 978-0-281-05927-0
26.Jump up ^ Pasquale, Frank. "Secularism & Secularity: Contemporary International Perspectives". Hartford, CT: Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture (ISSSC), 2007. p. 46. "Some self-identified Atheists consequently distinguish between “positive” and “negative” forms. There is general regard among members of these groups as nonreligious comrades-in-arms. There is shared concern about misrepresentation or misunderstanding of nonreligious people, erosion of church-state separation, public and political influence of conservative religion, and aspects of American domestic and international policy. But there are also notes of irreligious sectarianism. In a meeting of secular humanists, one audience member proclaims, “We have our fundamentalists, too. They’re called Atheists.” In an Atheist meeting across town, derisive asides make reference to “a lack of spine” or “going soft onreligion” among “the humanists.” These groups struggle for public recognition and legitimacy.
27.Jump up ^ Spencer, Herbert (1862). First Principles. London: Williams and Norgate, pp. 30-35.
28.Jump up ^ Spencer, First Principles, p. 36.
29.Jump up ^ Spencer, First Principles, p. 43.
30.Jump up ^ Asad, Talal (2003). Formations of the Secular : Christianity, Islam, Modernity (10. printing. ed.). Stanford University Press. p. 55. ISBN 0804747687.
31.Jump up ^ Martin, Michael. The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. Cambridge University Press. 2006. ISBN 0-521-84270-0.
32.Jump up ^ Nielsen, Kai (2009). "Atheism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 2012-06-09. Edwards, Paul (1967). "Atheism". The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 1. Collier-MacMillan. p. 175.
Flew, Antony (1984). God, Freedom, and Immortality: A Critical Analysis. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus. ISBN 0-87975-127-4.
33.Jump up ^ "Quotations : Atheism, Atheist. Quotes of Asimov, Allen, Buchan, Chesterton, Crisp, Goldman, Roberts, Rossetti, Santayana, Sartre, Vidal". Atheisme.free.fr. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
34.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church, English version, section 3.2.1.1.3
35.^ Jump up to: a b c Bacon, Francis (2002). The Major Works : Including New Atlantis and the Essays. Oxford University Press. p. 95-96, 125. ISBN 0192840819.
36.Jump up ^ Pope Benedict XVI. "Meeting with state authorities in the grounds of the Palace of Holyroodhouse". Retrieved 2012-06-09.
37.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2010-09-22). "Ratzinger is an enemy of humanity". The Guardian (London).
38.Jump up ^ ^ a b Baynes, Norman H., ed. (1969). The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939. New York: Howard Fertig. pp. 19-20, 37, 240, 370, 371, 375, 378, 382, 383, 385-388, 390-392, 398-399, 402, 405-407, 410, 1018, 1544, 1594.
39.Jump up ^ Tom Rees. Atheist nations are more peaceful, Epiphenom.com. Retrieved September 16, 2010
40.^ Jump up to: a b Michael Burleigh Sacred Causes HarperCollins (2006) p41, p42, p43
41.Jump up ^ Burleigh op. cit. p49 and p47
42.Jump up ^ Elsie, R. (2000). A Dictionary of Albanian Religion, Mythology, and Folk Culture. New York: NYU Press. p. 18. ISBN 0-8147-2214-8.
43.Jump up ^ David Binder, "Evolution in Europe; Albanian Leader Says the Country Will Be Democratized but Will Retain Socialism," The New York Times, May 14, 1990
44.Jump up ^ Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history Dinesh D'Souza
45.^ Jump up to: a b Answering Atheist’s Arguments Dinesh D'Souza
46.Jump up ^ 10 myths and 10 truths about Atheism Sam Harris
47.Jump up ^ Interview with Richard Dawkins conducted by Stephen Sackur for BBC News 24’s HardTalk programme, July 24th 2007. [1]
48.Jump up ^ The Video: Bill O'Reilly Interviews Richard Dawkins
49.Jump up ^ Dawkins 2006, p. 309
50.Jump up ^ Day (Theodore Beale), Vox (2008). The Irrational Atheist : Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens. BenBella Books. pp. 240–241]. ISBN 9781933771366.
51.Jump up ^ Fuller, Steve (2010). "What Has Atheism Ever Done For Science?". In Amarnath Amarasingam. Religion and the New Atheism A Critical Appraisal. Haymarket Books. pp. 75–76. ISBN 9781608462032.
52.^ Jump up to: a b c "Atheism and Science". Investigating Atheism project - Cambridge and Oxford. "Atheists have appealed to science in defence of their atheism since the first avowedly atheistic manuscripts of the mid seventeenth century. However, as the German expert on atheism Winfried Schroeder has shown, the relationship between early modern atheism and science tended to embarrass rather than strengthen the fledgling atheism's case.[1]" ; "The renowned Denis Diderot, atheist and deist in turns, could still say in 1746 that science posed a greater threat to atheism than metaphysics.[3] Well into the eighteenth century it could be argued that it was atheism and not theism which required a sacrifice of the intellect. As Schroeder has pointed out, atheists were scientifically retrograde until at least the mid eighteenth century, and suffered from their reputation as scientifically unserious.[4]" ; "As John Hedley Brooke has pointed out, for every nineteenth century person considering these issues who followed figures such as Thomas Henry Huxley or Francis Galton in regarding evolution as devastating for religious belief, there were others, such as the Oxford theologian Aubrey Moore, who regarded Darwin's evolutionary theory as an opportunity for religion.[7]At the beginning of the twenty first century the situation remains very similar:.."
53.Jump up ^ Henry, John (2000). "35. Atheism". In Gary Ferngren. The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition : An Encyclopedia. New York, NY: Garland. pp. 182–188. ISBN 0815316569.
54.Jump up ^ Wright, Robert. "The Trouble with the New Atheists: Part II". Huffington Post.
55.Jump up ^ Chaves, Mark (2010). "SSSR Presidential Address Rain Dances in the Dry Season: Overcoming the Religious Congruence Fallacy". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 49 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01489.x.
56.Jump up ^ Eller, Jack (2010). "What Is Atheism?". In Phil Zuckerman. Atheism and Secularity Vol.1: Issues, Concepts, Definitions. Praeger. pp. 14–15. ISBN 9780313351839.
57.Jump up ^ Jeffrey Robbins and Christopher Rodkey (2010). "Beating 'God' to Death: Radical Theology and the New Atheism". In Amarnath Amarasingam. Religion and the New Atheism A Critical Appraisal. Haymarket Books. p. 35. ISBN 9781608462032.
58.Jump up ^ William Stahl (2010). "One-Dimensional Rage: The Social Epistemology of the New Atheism and Fundamentalism". In Amarnath Amarasingam. Religion and the New Atheism A Critical Appraisal. Haymarket Books. pp. 97–108. ISBN 9781608462032.

[show]
v·
 t·
 e
 
Irreligion



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·



·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·



·



[show]
v·
 t·
 e
 
Arguments for and against belief in God



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



[show]
v·
 t·
 e
 
Theological thought


·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·


Portal icon 



[show]
v·
 t·
 e
 
Criticism of religion



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·



·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·


 

Categories: Atheism
Criticism of atheism



Navigation menu


Create account
Log in


Article
Talk





Read
Edit
View history




 Search 



Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikimedia Shop

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Toolbox





Print/export



Languages
Español
فارسی
Português
Русский
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 October 2013 at 03:25.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
 Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki