Now Reading
The Four Horsemen of the New Atheism
Slut for Slicha
A Very Jewcy Rosh Hashanah
Snipped and Satisfied
Schtupless in Seattle
Gefilte Guilt
Messy Meshugane. Again.

The Four Horsemen of the New Atheism

I'm tired. Most of my reading time in the last few weeks has been devoted to the "Four Horseman of Atheism"-Richard Dawkins, Daniel C. Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. And now that I've emerged from my self-imposed sequestration-blinking in the sunlight and desperate for a beer-I deeply regret ever suggesting this article to Zeek.

My problem is not with atheism per se. If someone does not believe in God, that's no concern of mine. Just as it's no concern if, say, another Jew practices a more stringent level of observance than I do. (Or a lesser one, but he'd tough to find.) My problem, rather, is with these authors, for their smugness and dogmatism. I felt alternatively harangued or patronized or downright bored. Reading their books, one after the other, was an enervating experience.

Champion of Godlessness: Christopher Hitchens

The exercise did begin well, with Hitchens' god [sic] is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. Hitchens is a gifted writer, so his book is actually entertaining. He explores many of the same themes as his colleagues in godlessness-how religion leads to ignorance, oppression, and ethical confusion-but in a more diverting way, despite, or maybe due to, his rhetorical excesses. Those who read this kind of book looking to be offended will come away satisfied: Hitchens calls the God of the Hebrews "ill-tempered and implacable and bloody and provincial"; he refers to Jesus as one of many "deranged prophets." Strong stuff, but why should he pretend to be reverent?

Many people dismiss Hitchens as a bloviator, an armchair warrior against "Islamofascism." But this book, anyway, is not an anti-Muslim screed. It's a sustained argument against the broader tenets of all religions-against the infallibility of scripture and the claim that religion "improves people." When Hitchens does discuss the murderous meetings of religion and politics (e.g. Belfast, Beirut, Belgrade), it's in support of his assertions, not to score points for "The War on Terror." And he is capable of tolerance. (Although I did wonder why, if, as Hitchens suggests, he'd be fine with religion if its adherents would just "leave [him] alone," he keeps running off to participate in televised debates.)

Extremist Atheist: Sam Harris

Anyway, if Hitchens goes overboard occasionally, Sam Harris falls in the water with disturbing frequency. In The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason, Harris argues that reason (e.g. secular humanism) is in a fight to the death with the forces of irrationality (e.g. evangelical Christians and every living Muslim). This is a plausible, if not original point. There is no place for faith in political discourse, and we are facing real threats, such as an "Islamist regime" acquiring "long-range nuclear weaponry." (Or short range, for that matter.) But Harris often evinces his own form of extremism. To him, even religious moderation is a hypocritical "myth." In fact, he wants to chuck the whole thing out the window-baby, bathwater, and baptismal font (or bimah). And unless we do, he argues, we're all gonna die-we risk a global, religious-based conflict that causes the end of civilization.

Okay, I suppose that this is a possibility. But so was Y2K. And I'm still scratching my head over his limited support of-wait for it-torture. In all fairness, this issue is a small part of The End of Faith. Still, it highlights the book's bizarre mixture of rationalism and fearmongering. Harris paraphrases Alan Dershowitz, that subtle thinker, who proposed that we consider torture if, say, we have custody of a "known terrorist" who "has planted a large bomb in the heart of a nearby city." Harris himself suggests that if we can accept wartime "collateral damage"-which he defines as "the inadvertent torture of innocent men, women, and children"-then we should be able to accept the purposeful torture of guilty people. In other words, "If there is even one chance in a million that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will tell us something under torture that will lead to the further dismantling of Al Qaeda," it would be "perverse" to disallow it.

Actually, what's perverse is using extreme examples to justify an unreliable, corrupting practice. And to assume that it's possible to use torture with judiciousness. Listen, if Dershowitz's scenario comes to pass, I will personally pay for the car battery. Until then, one chance in a million is not enough.

Scientific Fundamentalist: Daniel Dennett

With Harris' apocalyptic warnings ringing in my ears, I turned, with relief, to what I supposed would be the coolly objective realms of science. "Supposed" is the key word here, for the proponents of natural selection, apparently, can be just as unappealing as its detractors. In Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, Tufts professor Daniel Dennett "[extrapolates] back to human history with the aid of biological thinking." What this means, in English, is that Dennett speculates about the origin and development of religion through the lens of natural selection. For example, he explains that early "folk religions" may have served Darwinian needs-in terms of group survival through social cohesion, or individual survival through the placebo effects of superstitious rituals. Today, though, with democracy and antibiotics, we have no need for these outdated belief systems, whose benefits are "mixed" at best and "toxic" at worst.

While these ideas seem reasonable, there is something oppressive about Dennett's (and Dawkins') assumption that natural selection explains everything-that human development can only be seen in terms of competitive advantages. I admit that I am oversimplifying, and I would never argue against natural selection. I only wish to point out that irrespective of his "humble philosopher" persona, Dennett can be as smugly dogmatic as an evangelical preacher. Surely he can admit that some aspects of human behavior remain mysterious, if only because no one was around to observe their development? Probably not. The condescension, the self-satisfaction that oozes from every page of Breaking the Spell suggests otherwise. And there's really no excusing Dennett's assertion that atheists should call themselves "brights"-which Hitchens, to his infinite credit, refers to as "cringe-making."

Misfired: Richard Dawkins

I had similar problems with Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion-he, too, is hopelessly arrogant; he, too, cannot conceive of human behavior outside of the terms of natural selection. Take altruism. Why, Dawkins asks, should we want to help strangers-the "orphaned child weeping," or tsunami victims-if they can be of no direct help to us? It's an important question; one, Dawkins admits, that Darwinism doesn't "easily explain." But instead of turning to sociology or brain chemistry, he speculates that altruism is like sexual desire. We don't desire only those with whom it would be advantageous to mate. But hey, when we were baboons in "strong, stable bands," we helped and desired each other. So maybe, in humans, these are vestigial urges-maybe when you give a bum a quarter and feel strangely attracted to a surly barrista, you are experiencing Darwinian "misfirings," "blessed, precious mistakes." Maybe. Or maybe humans, having higher cognition and more complex societies than baboons, have these urges for reasons that are only related to natural selection. But why bother asking that, when we already have our theory of everything?

Most of Dawkins' book, though, isn't about religion and natural selection. Really it's an atheist tract. Or think of it as a primer, containing everything from refutations of Thomas Aquinas' "proofs" to the dubious morality of scripture. All this would be illuminating, if The God Delusion didn't read as if it were written with closed fists. Dawkins is a reputedly a good writer, and this may be evident in his other books. In this case, though, I grew impatient after the fifth time he (a) announced that a joke was coming; (b) told the joke; (c) reminded the reader that he had just read a joke. This may seem anti-intellectual: perhaps I should critique only the quality of his ideas. But style matters too. Especially when one has just read about the same topics in three previous books.

Not a Horseman: R.D. Gold

Now I must cop to another mistake. When I came across R.D. Gold's book, I assumed that he had written a kind of atheistic primer for Jews-which was why I thought Gold should ride with the Horsemen. Instead, with Bondage of the Mind: How Old Testament Fundamentalism Shackles the Mind and Enslaves the Spirit: Towards a Better Understanding of the Religious Experience Gold seems to be going for the world's longest subtitle.

Well, that and a book-length debunking of the tenets of Orthodox Judaism-which, to Gold, is synonymous with fundamentalism. An American Jew, Gold is troubled by the growing "aggressiveness" of Orthodox Jewry's proselytizing. Although there's little personal information about him, in his book or on the web, it seems safe to say that he was inspired by the Horsemen: he calls fundamentalism "one of the most noxious forces in the history of mankind." But Gold doesn't go as far as atheism, arguing instead that religion "can play a positive role in one's life-sociologically, philosophically, and psychologically."

Gold spends the better part of his book explaining that the Torah is "a fanciful account of Jewish history, not a historical record of what really happened." In other words, the Torah was not revealed at Mt. Sinai, the Exodus never occurred, there was no conquest of Canaan, and so on. In addition, Biblical prophecy, the "uniqueness of the Jewish people," and the "superior morality" of the Orthodox are all illusions or logical fallacies.

All of Gold's arguments are sound. As is the second, shorter part of the book, which presents a guardedly positive description of Reconstructionist Judaism. Here, the author also suggests that a propensity for religious or spiritual longings may be "hard-wired" into the human brain. But just whom is Gold addressing? Less religious folks like me are not going to start shlepping to shul just because "the operating system of the brain" says that it's a good idea. Nor will fundamentalists, Jewish or otherwise, be swayed by neurology.

Who's Still Reading?

Actually, the question of intended audience is a crucial one for all the aforementioned books. Only Dennett overtly wishes to cajole a religious reader into re-examining faith. The rest of them seem to be talking to people who already believe what they do. And what is the point of that? I did find it instructive to read Dawkins' speculations about morality and natural selection. But I'm not a creationist. Indeed, while I have reservations about all these books, for the most part I can't argue against their theses. That's because while I do believe in God, I also know that belief in His existence is not proof of His existence: there is no logical argument for faith.

Similarly, I know that you cannot claim a causal link between religious belief and ethical behavior. You could even argue the opposite, considering just how many religions have a long history of oppression and slaughter. Thus while I may irrationally ascribe to Judaism, I believe that religion has no place in any government or legal system. But these books aren't really about the separation of church (or synagogue) and state. These books are against religion, or fundamentalism, even though there's barely a chance in hell that an "Islamofascist" or a Kahanist or a Rapture-ready Christian will ever read them, let alone become "brights."

Why not? Because human beings are irrational. Against our own self-interests, we smoke, we eat too much cake, and we don't save money. Against all evidence to the contrary, we believe in God, or gods, or that a savior was born in Nazareth. And we kill each other in the names of these gods. It's depressing, but I don't see how we can stop it. Even if we could, we'd find "reasons" to bash each other's brains out anyway. I'm not concerned about the apocalypse; nor, paradoxically, do I place much faith in the elevating power of reason. People being what they are-that is, venal and stupid-I can easily imagine bloody wars over the question of who is more of a secular humanist.

View Comments (37)
  • Hello! I’m at work surfing around your blog from my new apple iphone!
    Just wanted to say I love reading your blog and look forward
    to all your posts! Carry on the superb work!

  • Hello i am kavin, its my first occasion to commenting anyplace, when i read this
    article i thought i could also make comment due to this
    sensible article.

    Also visit my blog … special

  • When I initially commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added”
    checkbox and now each time a comment is added I get four emails with the same comment.

    Is there any way you can remove me from that service? Thanks a lot!

  • If some one desires expert view on the topic of running a blog afterward i propose him/her to pay a
    quick visit this weblog, Keep up the pleasant work.

  • Good day! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but
    after browsing through some of the post I realized it’s new to me.
    Anyways, I’m definitely happy I found it and I’ll be
    book-marking and checking back frequently!

  • Definitely believe that which you stated. Your favorite
    reason seemed to be on the net the simplest thing to be aware of.
    I say to you, I definitely get irked while people think about worries that they plainly do not know about.
    You managed to hit the nail upon the top as well as defined
    out the whole thing without having side effect , people
    can take a signal. Will probably be back to get more.

  • Hey there! I know this is somewhat off topic but I was wondering if
    you knew where I could get a captcha plugin for my comment form?
    I’m using the same blog platform as yours and I’m
    having difficulty finding one? Thanks a lot!

  • This is the right blog for anyone who wants to find out about this topic.

    You know a whole lot its almost hard to argue with you (not
    that I really will need to…HaHa). You certainly put a brand new spin on a subject which has been discussed for a long time.
    Excellent stuff, just great!

  • Howdy! Quick question that’s entirely off topic. Do you know how to make
    your site mobile friendly? My blog looks weird when viewing from my apple iphone.

    I’m trying to find a theme or plugin that might be able to fix
    this issue. If you have any suggestions, please share. Thank you!

  • When some one searches for his necessary thing,
    thus he/she wants to be available that in detail, therefore that thing is maintained over here.

  • Amazing issues here. I am very glad to see your article.
    Thanks a lot and I am having a look ahead to contact you.
    Will you kindly drop me a e-mail?

  • You made some really good points there. I looked on the internet for more
    information about the issue and found most individuals will
    go along with your views on this website.

  • Heya i am for the first time here. I found this board and I find It truly useful &
    it helped me out much. I hope to give something back and help others like you aided me.

  • My partner and I absolutely love your blog and find nearly all of your post’s
    to be what precisely I’m looking for. Do you offer guest writers to write content to suit your needs?
    I wouldn’t mind creating a post or elaborating on a number
    of the subjects you write about here. Again, awesome blog!

  • I love what you guys are usually up too. Such clever work and reporting!

    Keep up the superb works guys I’ve incorporated you guys to my personal blogroll.

  • What’s Going down i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I have discovered It positively helpful and it has helped me out loads.
    I’m hoping to give a contribution & assist different users like its aided me.

    Great job.

  • Hello everybody, here every person is sharing these kinds of familiarity, so it’s nice to read this web site, and
    I used to pay a quick visit this blog all the time.

  • Everything is very open with a very clear explanation of
    the issues. It was definitely informative.

    Your website is useful. Many thanks for sharing!

  • With havin so much content do you ever run into any problems
    of plagorism or copyright infringement? My blog
    has a lot of exclusive content I’ve either authored myself or outsourced but it
    appears a lot of it is popping it up all
    over the web without my authorization. Do you know any ways to help stop content from
    being ripped off? I’d truly appreciate it.

  • Great post. I used to be checking continuously this weblog
    and I’m inspired! Very useful info specifically the ultimate
    section :) I handle such info a lot. I was seeking this certain information for a very long time.
    Thank you and best of luck.

  • I don’t know whether it’s just me or if everyone else encountering issues with your website.
    It appears like some of the text in your content
    are running off the screen. Can somebody else please comment and let me know if this is happening to them too?
    This might be a problem with my browser because I’ve
    had this happen previously. Appreciate it

  • I am extremely impressed with your writing skills and also with the layout on your weblog.
    Is this a paid theme or did you customize it yourself?

    Anyway keep up the nice quality writing, it is
    rare to see a great blog like this one today.

  • Hello! This is my 1st comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout out and say
    I truly enjoy reading through your articles. Can you suggest any other
    blogs/websites/forums that cover the same subjects?
    Thanks for your time!

  • Excellent post however , I was wondering if you could write a litte
    more on this subject? I’d be very grateful if you could elaborate
    a little bit further. Many thanks!

  • Do you have a spam issue on this site; I also am a blogger, and I was wanting
    to know your situation; we have created some
    nice practices and we are looking to trade solutions with others, be
    sure to shoot me an email if interested.

  • I’m no longer certain the place you’re getting your information, however great topic.
    I must spend a while finding out much more or working out more.
    Thanks for great information I was on the lookout for this info for my mission.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Scroll To Top