What do you think of New Atheism, Veeky Forums?

What do you think of New Atheism, Veeky Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/05/12/neil-degrasse-tyson-and-the-value-of-philosophy/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Frankly, if moderate religion was abandoned, and it came down to athiests vs. fanatics, fanatics would probably win easily.

Old atheists were better

Full of meme scientists as leaders.

AKA, people who are shit at science so they talk about science to fucking normies who eat it up.

Normies think adding to the hobby list listening to 'scientists' talk about space and stars and shit makes them intelligent.

Sadly, Neal Degrasse Tyson talking about how star trek space ships would actually not make noise in space isn't fuckign science.

So these idiot fucks who can't write science papers decide to write hack tier edgey philosophy books without knowing a thing about philosophy.

>I'm going to use tools to examine the physical world to prove a non-physical entity does not exist

So stupid they don't' even understand what science is, they then mock philsophy as worthless despite that being the enterprise they are attempting to pursue with their HACK books.

NDT got his doctorate solely because of his skin color. He has like 3 papers with his name as 3rd author. Now he is an administrator at a planetarium.

Dawkins is the same shit. He has 12 papers about bumble bee digging patterns. He was so fucking shitty at it he decided to sell edgey books to reddit.com.

You can easily tell who's an idiot and who isn't by how much respect they have for 'new atheism'.

What about fanatical atheists like the Soviets?

I dunno, I kind of liked Hitchens, although his followers are the worst. That's my problem with these guys, they may have a somewhat toxic way of viewing religion, but at least they'll debate with you and treat you with respect as a person. Their followers who insist they are inerrant constantly belittle you and sound like they wish you were dead.

Wow. This picture legitimately made me angry.

The Soviet Union doesn't exist.

At best you'd get China and like half the European Union.

>I kind of liked Hitchens
He was a decent journalist and alright speaker.

This didn't save him from getting his ass kicked by Craig.

NOT to endorse Craig's brand of apologism, but it's just funny to me watching Hitchens genuinely struggle with the concept of comparative anthropology as if it's some foreign entity.

Really, because it makes my dick hard.

Here's my favorite article derascinating the New Atheism's take on philosophy:
scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/05/12/neil-degrasse-tyson-and-the-value-of-philosophy/

they dont seem to understand anything, and exept for harris who is a sort of utilitarian buddhist they are mostly all protestant christians, completely, they know truths, and have seen the light, and will go forth against the darkness of ignorance and superstition to bring the light of reason to the world, literaly like a bunch of retarded moralfagging baptists

The leaders are fine but their fans are fucking trash more often that not.

I don't think they understand the fact that religion still has a purpose, that is to provide hope. And is the reason I wish I wasn't an empiricist and could still harbour a place in my life for God or gods, but I cannot, sadly.

I struggle with the same thing friend.

I wonder why everyone don't realize God is mere words.It is just the product of thinking dependent on each language's grammars.

>that is to provide hope
Harris nominally understands this; he writes on the neurocognitive benefits of meditative states, gave some lectures on the dangers of atheism on this exact topic, and his moral philosophy is rooted in Buddhism, "For the good of all sentient beings", etc.

dawkins is ok if you're being generous. scam harris is a total charlatan.

Sad times when you've forced yourself into accepting a not so comfy death. :/

Not too bad than, but morons like Neil deGrasse Tyson just annoy me with their popsci rubbish and plethora of platitudes. You can tell he's just doing it to try and sound 'intelligent', whilst maintaining his 'street cred'.

...

Currently there are two types of atheism.

The first is 'new atheism' and its popular in protestant countries like the UK, Sweden, the US.

The other is Marxist/Jacobin atheism and its popular in former catholic countries like Spain, Italy, France. France obviously still has the atheism leftover from the revolution and they also have the marxist informed type mixed in.

I think the marxist type is weaker as it died off pretty fast in Russia as i think 60% of the population is now Orthodox up from less than 5% in the USSR.

We will see how the New Atheism fares. It is, in my mind the weakest atheistic platform from an intellectual viewpoint.

The strongest being the classic one from the enlightenment and the marxist one somewhere in between.

read kirkegaard friendo

why does that matter?

Will do, my Veeky Forumstory brother-in-arms.

I believe the term is:
>Saved

worse than Redditors give them credit
better then contrarians give them credit

If you want to see a smackdown of Craig, see him debate a legit philosopher. There's a YouTube video of him debating Shelley Kagan about morality. It's pretty great. I like Hitchens because he was a drunk intellectual who stirred the shit, that's pretty much it though.

Again, I'm not down for Craig's anything, I just think he ran circles around Hitch. Watching Craig fumble against a real philosopher is like watching Hitch fumble against Craig. It's a spiral of bad.

I got a ton of these.

I think you'd best keep them coming, nice and rapid.

Gladly.

I wouldn't say SHelley won the debate however he clearly understands what he is talking about where Sam Harris and Hitchens are clearly clueless.

Fun to see someone with actual intelligence talk for a change though.

You know how to make me smile, user, you really do.

^This, desu.

Some of these files are riddled with spelling errors, I didn't make 'em and don't have the template.

...

...

The sentiment is what matters, grammatical nitpicking and semantic snark are only matter in academic application or when they detract from the legibility.

It still looks bad.

There is no such thing as "New Atheism"

the only reason the left hates this so called "New Atheism" movement is that they go after Islam, which the regressive left is afraid to do in fear of being called "racist

Its the reason Hitchens was exiled from the left, if these men just talked shit about Christianity, there would be no controversy

...

I've also got some just plain snarky condescending 'smugreactionimage.jpg' type quotes I'll drop for you.

...

All ammo for Veeky Forums, I'll be the triggering shitposting king, I am very excited. This is better then when I had to keep editing Paris Tuileries' statue just so I could keep shitposting with a condescending guile.

...

You'll love this'n.

It'll perfectly for Veeky Forums, when they're busy railing on folks and pointing them to /x/ or Veeky Forums whilst themselves jabbering about the metaphysical. I like you, user, we are sympatico.

>muh qualia

...

Shit, another good one.

theres also the existential one based on things like sartre and the postmodern variant based on simple scepticism and irony

however, at least here in eastern europe, the dominant and most vital form is a kind of ''popular atheism'', a kind of basic, pessimistic realism, a reflection of both individual life experience and personal thought and collective experiences that reinfoce it, together with a general disdain for anyone bringing great truths, divine or othervise

this isnt even strictly denominational, when you see statistics sayng this or that country has xy% of religious people, you have to bare in mind less than 20% of that are practicing, churchgoing believers, and of the rest a good half is probably just declaring themselves as whichever faith is part of their national or ethnic identity

actualy if statistics would go for tests where they ask people a mix of variations on 'do you believe in a god?' or 'do you believe in a afterlife?' etc, and crossreferenced these ansvers to get a model of a jeudochristian monotheist should say, you wouldnt get 30% in most countries, in some even less

Son, each image is a thread generating worth of rage.

Such perfection only rarely kisses the skin of Aphrodite, consider I Hephaestus; Veeky Forums Ares and these? My net.

>The angel told Descartes: "The conquest of nature shall be accomplished by measure and number."

I'm running out of McKenna's epistemology shitposting, I got a ton more about Gnosticism and taking drugs.

>Every morning when I wake from my slumber, I look in the mirror and tell myself: "Dubito, cogito, ergo sum."
>And yet?
>I still struggle to believe.
:^)

You have no idea what I'd give to go back and teach Descartes yoga to get all that "cogito, ergo sum" shit out of his head.

Or just feed him a handsome dose of lysergic acid diethylamide, dimethyltryptamine or straight-up psilocybin. ;)

Descartes was a mescaline candidate, imho.
That'd have the higher chance for 'breakthrough', and psychs aren't the most reliable for certain yogic ego busting purposes. In either case I think the 'stained glass' quality would fuck with his preexisting Christism in all the right ways.

I was going to mention peyote, but je ne sais pas?
So, target the pre-existing notions within his psyche for greater efficacy? I like it.

you ever had. so shit. just do lsd or 1p-lsd. or better yet, shrooms.

>cogito ergo cago

I did just list these: .

You memed my meme, that is pretty meme.

I like it because of the huge amount of butthurt it causes.

But why would you willingly blindfold yourself?