Is The New Atheist Literature Intellectually Frivolous?

[Keith Maitland]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

"The New Atheist writers are supremely self-confident in their ability to dispatch opponents with a sarcastic quip or two. And they show no evidence whatsoever of knowing what they are talking about [.....] The New Atheism must of necessity be a New Philistinism, deliberately closing its mind to the wisdom of millennia—to the serious consideration, or even the reading, of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke, lest these dangerous ideas tempt one to doubt the secularist creed. Or, in the words of a better-known exercise in doublethink: “Ignorance is strength.”

RTWT here:

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-new-philistinism/

[jeremyp]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?


"The New Atheist writers are supremely self-confident in their ability to dispatch opponents with a sarcastic quip or two. And they show no evidence whatsoever of knowing what they are talking about [.....] The New Atheism must of necessity be a New Philistinism, deliberately closing its mind to the wisdom of millennia—to the serious consideration, or even the reading, of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke, lest these dangerous ideas tempt one to doubt the secularist creed. Or, in the words of a better-known exercise in doublethink: “Ignorance is strength.”

RTWT here:

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-new-philistinism/

Yes, it's utter crap. Instead of addressing the arguments, he is denigrating the "New Atheists" with a stream of insults. The tone is set by the cartoon at the beginning which is a lie. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Richard Dawkins has read more of the Bible than the average Christian, certainly the average CofE Christian.

"Ignorance is strength" is the creed of the religious right, not the atheists.

[Shaker]

It's not only utter crap, it's a textbook example of the Courtier's Reply:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Courtier's_Reply

as Feser knows but can't refute, judging by his woeful effort to do so.

Given that the so-called "New Atheist" (not a term I like or use, but I'll run with it) group includes an evolutionary biologist, two philosophers, a physicist-philosopher and a neuroscientist (to name but a few) then no, I don't think their writings are frivolous. Some are better than others (the late Victor Stenger was a poor communicator, IMO), but frivolous and philistine? No.

[ippy]

It's not only utter crap, it's a textbook example of the Courtier's Reply:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Courtier's_Reply

as Feser knows but can't refute, judging by his woeful effort to do so.

Given that the so-called "New Atheist" (not a term I like or use, but I'll run with it) group includes an evolutionary biologist, two philosophers, a physicist-philosopher and a neuroscientist (to name but a few) then no, I don't think their writings are frivolous. Some are better than others (the late Victor Stenger was a poor communicator, IMO), but frivolous and philistine? No.

Does it mention Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot, it would be so unusual if it doesn't?
(Sorry I haven't had time to read it yet).

ippy 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Funnily enough I heard of Feser for the first time only a few days ago. On the basis of the article of his I read, he's not very bright is he?

Makes me think that some of us here should apply immediately to be professors of philosophy at American universities...

[Red Giant]

of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke,

"Wisdom of millennia"?  Those sorts of writings are full of contradictions, fallacies and nonsense.

Education used to consist of learning to accept the impossible.  The more ridiculous the stuff you could swallow, the more educated you were.  Things haven't changed much in some quarters.

[ippy]

Funnily enough I heard of Feser for the first time only a few days ago. On the basis of the article of his I read, he's not very bright is he?

Makes me think that some of us here should apply immediately to be professors of philosophy at American universities...

That very much applies to psychology as well.

ippy

[Harrowby Hall]

That very much applies to psychology as well.

ippy

Explain.

[ippy]

That very much applies to psychology as well.

ippy

Explain.

Yes the large volume of the work undertaken by clinical psychologists and psychologists over there in America could be administered by a five minute or less chat with a friend and more often than not would be here in the UK, so I'm assured first hand by two psychologists in my family, plus four others of my family that have professional reasons to deal with this subject.

I believe psychologists make good money over there in the US, maybe the general US public are persuaded to visit as often as poss by I guess, psychologists.   

It's not my trade psychology but I get to hear a lot about the generalities of it but if you need more info about the intricacies, I'm not your man.

ippy

[Udayana]

hmmm .. is that why we don't have the mental health services, facilities and resources that people are complaining about on a daily basis?

[Harrowby Hall]

   

Funnily enough I heard of Feser for the first time only a few days ago. On the basis of the article of his I read, he's not very bright is he?

    Makes me think that some of us here should apply immediately to be professors of philosophy at American universities...

That very much applies to psychology as well.

ippy

Explain.

Yes the large volume of the work undertaken by clinical psychologists and psychologists over there in America could be administered by a five minute or less chat with a friend and more often than not would be here in the UK, so I'm assured first hand by two psychologists in my family, plus four others of my family that have professional reasons to deal with this subject.

I believe psychologists make good money over there in the US, maybe the general US public are persuaded to visit as often as poss by I guess, psychologists.   

It's not my trade psychology but I get to hear a lot about the generalities of it but if you need more info about the intricacies, I'm not your man.

ippy

So you are saying that the behaviour of clinicians in a specific application in a commercialised foreign medical system means that academics generally should be replaced?

[ippy]

   

Funnily enough I heard of Feser for the first time only a few days ago. On the basis of the article of his I read, he's not very bright is he?

    Makes me think that some of us here should apply immediately to be professors of philosophy at American universities...

That very much applies to psychology as well.

ippy

Explain.

Yes the large volume of the work undertaken by clinical psychologists and psychologists over there in America could be administered by a five minute or less chat with a friend and more often than not would be here in the UK, so I'm assured first hand by two psychologists in my family, plus four others of my family that have professional reasons to deal with this subject.

I believe psychologists make good money over there in the US, maybe the general US public are persuaded to visit as often as poss by I guess, psychologists.   

It's not my trade psychology but I get to hear a lot about the generalities of it but if you need more info about the intricacies, I'm not your man.

ippy

So you are saying that the behaviour of clinicians in a specific application in a commercialised foreign medical system means that academics generally should be replaced?

No, as I thought I had explained, I live with these people and often hear their comments but psychology, this isn't a specialist area of mine.

I assume when they express things like, we seem to be far less phobic here in the UK than is common place in the States, because they know so much more about this subject than I do, well, I'm inclined to think they're the experts.

I don't know the reasons why and that's exactly why I inserted a 'maybe' into the text of my post so that my comment could be taken as just a comment and no more than that. 

ippy

[splashscuba]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

"The New Atheist writers are supremely self-confident in their ability to dispatch opponents with a sarcastic quip or two. And they show no evidence whatsoever of knowing what they are talking about [.....] The New Atheism must of necessity be a New Philistinism, deliberately closing its mind to the wisdom of millennia—to the serious consideration, or even the reading, of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke, lest these dangerous ideas tempt one to doubt the secularist creed. Or, in the words of a better-known exercise in doublethink: “Ignorance is strength.”

RTWT here:

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-new-philistinism/

What's a "New atheist" ?

[Shaker]

An atheist with a computer and internet connection, I think.

[splashscuba]

An atheist with a computer and internet connection, I think.

Cool. That's me then. Was I an "Old Atheist" before I had a computer ?

[Shaker]

At your age, definitely 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

"The New Atheist writers are supremely self-confident in their ability to dispatch opponents with a sarcastic quip or two. And they show no evidence whatsoever of knowing what they are talking about [.....] The New Atheism must of necessity be a New Philistinism, deliberately closing its mind to the wisdom of millennia—to the serious consideration, or even the reading, of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke, lest these dangerous ideas tempt one to doubt the secularist creed. Or, in the words of a better-known exercise in doublethink: “Ignorance is strength.”

RTWT here:

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-new-philistinism/

What's a "New atheist" ?

A wanker...............You did ask.

[splashscuba]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

"The New Atheist writers are supremely self-confident in their ability to dispatch opponents with a sarcastic quip or two. And they show no evidence whatsoever of knowing what they are talking about [.....] The New Atheism must of necessity be a New Philistinism, deliberately closing its mind to the wisdom of millennia—to the serious consideration, or even the reading, of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke, lest these dangerous ideas tempt one to doubt the secularist creed. Or, in the words of a better-known exercise in doublethink: “Ignorance is strength.”

RTWT here:

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-new-philistinism/

What's a "New atheist" ?

A wanker...............You did ask.

Well, I do that too. Everything in moderation though.

[Outrider]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

"The New Atheist writers are supremely self-confident in their ability to dispatch opponents with a sarcastic quip or two. And they show no evidence whatsoever of knowing what they are talking about [.....] The New Atheism must of necessity be a New Philistinism, deliberately closing its mind to the wisdom of millennia—to the serious consideration, or even the reading, of the arguments of writers like Aristotle and Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas and Duns Scotus, Leibniz and Clarke, lest these dangerous ideas tempt one to doubt the secularist creed. Or, in the words of a better-known exercise in doublethink: “Ignorance is strength.”

RTWT here:

https://www.aei.org/publication/the-new-philistinism/

What's a "New atheist" ?

A wanker...............You did ask.

Well, I do that too. Everything in moderation though.

Do you? I've subcontracted that out, it's the modern anti-theist way, don't you know.

O.

[King Oberon]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

My initial thought was that he's an attention seeking idiot but having read his 'critique' or ramblings as they are I can only conclude my initial thought was correct.

Atheists (new old or middle aged) or as I like to call them people can make up their own minds on any 'evidence' past or present and draw conclusions from that.

The only different between now and the past is that people are better educated and education mean less religion since that is based on not questioning anything because if you dare to look at it too closely it falls apart and unfortunately for some that would require facing death for what it is and the fantasy that keeps them going would come crumbling down.

Oh well I suppose ignorance/delusion is comforting if nothing else.   

[SqueakyVoice]

What's a "New atheist" ?

A wanker...............You did ask.

That explains why I keep hearing the crowd chanting "The referee's a new atheist" on MOTD.

[Nearly Sane]

What's a "New atheist" ?

A wanker...............You did ask.

That explains why I keep hearing the crowd chanting "The referee's a new atheist" on MOTD.

Also 'who's the Dawkins in the black?'

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Any thoughts on this critique by Edward Feser?

My initial thought was that he's an attention seeking idiot but having read his 'critique' or ramblings as they are I can only conclude my initial thought was correct.

Atheists (new old or middle aged) or as I like to call them people can make up their own minds on any 'evidence' past or present and draw conclusions from that.

The only different between now and the past is that people are better educated and education mean less religion since that is based on not questioning anything because if you dare to look at it too closely it falls apart and unfortunately for some that would require facing death for what it is and the fantasy that keeps them going would come crumbling down.

Oh well I suppose ignorance/delusion is comforting if nothing else. 

How does anybody even come close to Richard Dawkins for attention seeking?
New Atheists are a bunch of rocket polishers par excellence.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlunderer,

New Atheists are a bunch of rocket polishers par excellence.

Apart from your repeated argumenta ad hominem, do you actually have anything to say about the content of the writings you're attempting to critique?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlunderer,

New Atheists are a bunch of rocket polishers par excellence.

Apart from your repeated argumenta ad hominem, do you actually have anything to say about the content of the writings you're attempting to critique?

Wot Edward Feser said..............