Showing posts with label Postmodernism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Postmodernism. Show all posts

Monday, 31 October 2011

New Atheism: In the Wake of the Cold War and Postmodernism

Is it really possible to explain New Atheism as a response to Christian and Islamic fundamentalism over the last decade or so? This seems to be the standard explanation out there, but I think it only tells a part of the story. While New Atheism certainly wouldn’t make sense without reference to religious fundamentalism, there are many good reasons to think that it has also been fed by a crisis within liberal, progressive and secular thought itself.

I will here suggest three reasons for thinking this; there are undoubtedly more. Firstly, New Atheists dedicate a significant portion of their energy to attacking not just religion, but also certain ‘liberals’ – i.e. people whose progressive values they share, but who have adopted a position of cultural relativism which makes them reluctant to condemn the actions of people who hold different values. In more abstract terms, New Atheism is a firm rejection of postmodernism, that form of thought seen by some as defining what it meant to be left wing. The scientific method, and the possibility of ascertaining objective Truth, is not simply offered as a riposte to the religious, but also to left-wing cultural relativists.

Secondly, New Atheism can be seen as merely one facet of a much wider cultural trend in which the virtues of science and rationalism have been valorised. This can be seen, for example, in what I’ll refer to here as the ‘bad science’ movement, whose figureheads are Ben Goldacre and Simon Singh; both of whom work to expose the false or exaggerated claims made by practitioners of alternative medicine, pharmaceutical companies, psychics and the media. This group and New Atheism come together in the annual variety show Nine Lessons and Carols for Godless People.

Thirdly, there is a more clearly political facet of this cultural shift which also overlaps with New Atheism. Three books from recent years will serve as examples: Francis Wheen’s How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World (2004), Nick Cohen’s What’s Left (2007) and Kenan Malik’s From Fatwa to Jihad (2009) are all written from the perspective of left wing authors who reject cultural relativism and postmodernism in general. The attitude can also be seen in the Euston Manifesto, written by a group of academics, journalists and bloggers in 2006 and announcing a new political alignment of ‘progressives and democrats.’ While these authors and the signatories of the Euston Manifesto identify themselves as a new political alignment, they in fact look back in time, beyond the recent ‘new left’ of identity politics, and even further back beyond the ‘old left’ of class politics, and attempt to re-establish a connection with the progressive liberalism of the eighteenth century enlightenment.

To summarise: New Atheism cannot be seen simply as a direct response to religious fundamentalism and is, rather, part of a broader shift within secular Western thought itself. It should be seen as only one manifestation of an attempt on behalf of progressives to regroup and redefine themselves in the wake of the Cold War and postmodernism.

Sunday, 19 June 2011

New Atheism Blog - Intro: Working Out What the Hell I'm Doing

Welcome to the latest of my many attempts to start blogging regularly!

This blog is mainly intended to be an outlet for ideas related to what will hopefully end up as a PhD project, though I will undoubtedly stray into other territory, be it personal, political or pointless. Feel free to post comments and I'll do my best to respond! Just an intro for now to help people (including myself) work out what I'm talking about.

I'm interested in taking a critical look at the public debate about atheism and the role of religion in contemporary society - not adopting a simplistic stance on whether religion is 'good' or 'bad', but, rather, to trace the roots of this debate and ask why it has become such an urgent issue in our culture. It is often seen as a straightforward response to Islamic and Christian fundamentalism, but I think there is a more complex and interesting story to tell about where it originates from - and it has its roots in a crisis of moral legitimacy within liberalism itself.

A point to make early on about my stance on Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and others associated with 'New Atheism' - I am an atheist myself, and I have no time for for the crazier 'scientific' arguments supporting the existence of God. While I share this position with the New Atheists, I also understand that many people who believe in God don't base their belief on 'scientific' claims anyway, and not all religious people hold irrational moral positions based on dogma. I feel that there is much to be regretted about 'New Atheism', which has had an unnecessarily divisive impact on public debate and has created a crude and over-simplified picture of the role that religion plays in many people's lives.

I also think that there has been a failure on the part of the New Atheists and their supporters to reflect on the foundations of their own intellectual positions. For me, New Atheism is not only responding to an attack on secular liberal democracies by religious fundamentalism, but also to a crisis of moral legitimacy within liberalism itself. The flawed attempts by Harris and Dawkins in particular to claim a 'scientific' basis for their values reflect this, and I think that their focus on attacking religion distracts liberals from examining problems within their own ideologies.

That probably doesn't clarify very much but it will hopefully start to make sense as I slowly work out what the hell I'm talking about. Feel free to argue - I'm open to revising my ideas, though I won't necessarily admit that I was ever wrong about anything.

Follow me on Twitter @Steverini.