What did Atheists do before Dawkins?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It was Dawkins who urged atheists to be more vocal and antitheistic. And they did.
How then, before Dawkins and the rise of religion forums did members make their atheism and antitheism public?

[Outrider]

In many cases they didn't, I suspect. Professor Dawkins, and others of the era, weren't saying anything particularly new from what I can see, they were just saying it out loud, publicly, apologetically, with the deference religious feeling was due rather than the deference it expected.

The Blind Watchmaker came out when I was 12, although I wasn't aware of it for probably a decade or so after that - by the time I was at university I was aware of atheists making arguments, but it was still on the quiet until the New Atheist movement really came about in the mid 2000s, and really caught the public eye following 9/11.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In many cases they didn't, I suspect. Professor Dawkins, and others of the era, weren't saying anything particularly new from what I can see, they were just saying it out loud, publicly, apologetically, with the deference religious feeling was due rather than the deference it expected.

The Blind Watchmaker came out when I was 12, although I wasn't aware of it for probably a decade or so after that - by the time I was at university I was aware of atheists making arguments, but it was still on the quiet until the New Atheist movement really came about in the mid 2000s, and really caught the public eye following 9/11.

O.

I’m afraid what atheists have to say vis a vis their position is limited to They lack belief in God or there is no God. Dawkins therefore stimulated a need or want to tell people about it. What was new about it was more the public antitheism which imho reached swivel eyed proportions.
As an agnostic atheist in the seventies and early eighties. I assumed I held the majority view and that religion and the religious were just quaintly odd but harmless enough.

[Stranger]

It was Dawkins who urged atheists to be more vocal and antitheistic. And they did.
How then, before Dawkins and the rise of religion forums did members make their atheism and antitheism public?

Why do theists so often think Dawkins is important to atheists? I remember having long debates at university about religion, and that was before Dawkins had published any books except The Selfish Gene, and certainly a long time before I'd read any of his stuff.

I think the internet and discussion forums has had a bigger impact, merely because you don't have to tiptoe around possibly offending people (if they don't want to be disagreed with, then why be on an internet forum?) Back before then, you had to be sure that you were talking to somebody who would treat it as an intellectual discussion and not get offended (much easier in a university setting).

Even after I started reading Dawkins, it was mainly to learn about evolution, rather than his religious stuff. I guess the so called 'new atheists' did make a difference to how publicly some people expressed their atheism and that can only be good IMO, but Dawkins' contribution was hardly pivotal to me, at least.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In the forties and fifties I believe a media mogul told his outlets to “Puff Billy Graham”.
Was Dawkins puffed? He seems pretty damned good at self advertisement.

[jeremyp]

Theists won't shut up about God. Why shouldn't atheists put the opposite point of view?

I don't understand why you get so butthurt about atheists pointing out the emptiness of theist arguments...

... oh wait...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Theists won't shut up about God. Why shouldn't atheists put the opposite point of view?

I don't understand why you get so butthurt about atheists pointing out the emptiness of theist arguments...

... oh wait...

I think you are deviating somewhat from the thread.
What did you do before Dawkins? Did you announce your atheism publicly and loudly? If so, who, why, what, where, when?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Theists won't shut up about God. Why shouldn't atheists put the opposite point of view?

I don't understand why you get so butthurt about atheists pointing out the emptiness of theist arguments...

... oh wait...

It seems to me that most theists have pissed of from here Jeremy. I think it was invincible ignorance on the part of atheists..........

[Gordon]

It seems to me that most theists have pissed of from here Jeremy. I think it was invincible ignorance on the part of atheists..........

Or maybe there are fewer of them around these days.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Or maybe there are fewer of them around these days.

I think you'd have to survey the numbers not only of this forum but successful forums, too, Gordon.

[Maeght]

It was Dawkins who urged atheists to be more vocal and antitheistic. And they did.
How then, before Dawkins and the rise of religion forums did members make their atheism and antitheism public?

Why do you ask?

[Gordon]

I think you'd have to survey the numbers not only of this forum but successful forums, too, Gordon.

Don't need to do that - the downturn in people self-identifying as religious gives a good enough indication.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czddp0j488qo

[Nearly Sane]

I think you'd have to survey the numbers not only of this forum but successful forums, too, Gordon.

Badly done, Vlad.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

It seems to me that most theists have pissed of from here Jeremy. I think it was invincible ignorance on the part of atheists..........

Or maybe "on the part of" theists who realised that the long-cherished arguments they used to justify their beliefs were full of holes. 

[SqueakyVoice]

I think you are deviating somewhat from the thread.
What did you do before Dawkins? Did you announce your atheism publicly and loudly? If so, who, why, what, where, when?

As a kid, I used to play (mini)Rugby on a Sunday. That may be why I still have a religious experience when I'm watching it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Or maybe "on the part of" theists who realised that the long-cherished arguments they used to justify their beliefs were full of holes.

Why is it I feel this post is mostly about your assessment of your own achievements in this field.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As a kid, I used to play (mini)Rugby on a Sunday. That may be why I still have a religious experience when I'm watching it.

Do you experience ecstasy?Do you forget about yourself?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Why do you ask?

Interest. A whole industry sprung up around Dawkins and his exhorting people to take a stand against religion.

[Steve H]

What did Walt do before Dawkins? Did he have a similar obsession with Bertie Russell?

[Outrider]

I’m afraid what atheists have to say vis a vis their position is limited to They lack belief in God or there is no God.

If that were the case you wouldn't keep going on and on and on and on and on about him.

Dawkins therefore stimulated a need or want to tell people about it.

No. 9/11 stimulated a need to talk about it, Professor Dawkins was just one of the more prominent people to do so.

What was new about it was more the public antitheism which imho reached swivel eyed proportions.

Can you explain what was different in his, and others of the time's, position from what had been said before, just more quietly? Can you explain why rejecting unsubstantiated claims and pointing out the very, very prominent (at the time) perils of religion is 'swivel-eyed'? How is 'this religious terrorism is terrible' swivel-eyed in the face of thousands of bodies being searched for in the rubble of the World Trade Centre?

As an agnostic atheist in the seventies and early eighties. I assumed I held the majority view and that religion and the religious were just quaintly odd but harmless enough.

And then in the mid-2000s 9/11 highlighted that religion wasn't necessarily harmless enough, and then people prepared to face up to religion and talk openly highlighted all sorts of other problem areas. Since then we've had numerous scandals and problems highlighted - the undue veneration of Mother Theresa, the ongoing attempts by various churches to try to cover up their inadequate responses to child abuse within their ranks, the religious oppression of women in places like Afghanistan.

You say that in the 70's and 80's atheism viewed religion as a quaint throwback - what Professor Dawkins and others did is highlight that it's not as innocuous as that. The theology didn't change, the sociology did - the impact of religion was no longer limited to 'irrelevant to good'.

O.

[Maeght]

Interest. A whole industry sprung up around Dawkins and his exhorting people to take a stand against religion.

Not a way of making a point?

[jeremyp]

I think you are deviating somewhat from the thread.
What did you do before Dawkins? Did you announce your atheism publicly and loudly? If so, who, why, what, where, when?

I'm attacking one of the premises in your first post which is that you think atheists who point out that theists are just guessing shouldn't be doing that, or have only recently started doing that.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What did Walt do before Dawkins? Did he have a similar obsession with Bertie Russell?

My life was totally bereft Steve, then one day, there he was, That hair, this intellectual Adonis.........

Bertie Russell? Not my type......sorry, It just isn’t.....and there’s the end of it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm attacking one of the premises in your first post which is that you think atheists who point out that theists are just guessing shouldn't be doing that, or have only recently started doing that.

I’m not suggesting they shouldn’t do it,nor can I expect they shouldn’t do it.
It just seemed there wasn’t the will or the means to take on so as people did. As an agnostic atheist I never felt so strongly motivated, I never questioned that I might be wrong.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You say that in the 70's and 80's atheism viewed religion as a quaint throwback - what Professor Dawkins and others did is highlight that it's not as innocuous as that. The theology didn't change, the sociology did - the impact of religion was no longer limited to 'irrelevant to good'.

O.

When 9/11 occurred I had been a Christian for around 20 years. The process and pretexts for condensing the whole of Religion into that one act or one person strikes me as a form of bigotry. I still chuckle over the tiny Westbrook baptist community held up as typically Christian. Or Trumpite churches held up by atheists as American Christianity while forgetting totally about episcopalian and black churches.

As I understand it, certainly in this country relations between modern celebrity atheists and media Christians are quite cordial with each willing to provide tea and platform for the other