|
Written by Chief
|
|
Monday, 29 October 2007 05:51 |
Angst, anger, rage. A progression can be seen along these lines if we trace the arguments of atheists from the 19th century to today, so where does one go after one has popped the bubbles of anger and disappointment? Well of course you can repeat the cycle, or you may well end up attacking the institutions and affiliated culture built around the religions.
Theodore Dalrymple, himself not a believer, wrote a long piece for the City Journal opening with the subtitle: To regret religion is to regret Western civilization.
Read the whole piece, here is just a part from midway through his article.
Lying not far beneath the surface of all
the neo-atheist books is the kind of historiography that many of us
adopted in our hormone-disturbed adolescence, furious at the discovery
that our parents sometimes told lies and violated their own precepts
and rules. It can be summed up in Christopher Hitchenss drumbeat in God Is Not Great: Religion spoils everything.What? The Saint Matthew Passion? The Cathedral of Chartres?
The emblematic religious person in these books seems to be a Glasgow
Airport bombera type unrepresentative of Muslims, let alone
communicants of the poor old Church of England. It is surely not news,
except to someone so ignorant that he probably wouldnt be interested
in these books in the first place, that religious conflict has often
been murderous and that religious people have committed hideous
atrocities. But so have secularists and atheists, and though they have
had less time to prove their mettle in this area, they have proved it
amply. If religious belief is not synonymous with good behavior,
neither is absence of belief, to put it mildly. In fact, one can write the history of anything as a chronicle of
crime and folly. Science and technology spoil everything: without
trains and IG Farben, no Auschwitz; without transistor radios and
mass-produced machetes, no Rwandan genocide. First you decide what you
hate, and then you gather evidence for its hatefulness. Since man is a
fallen creature (I use the term metaphorically rather than in its
religious sense), there is always much to find. The thinness of the new atheism is evident in its approach to our
civilization, which until recently was religious to its core. To regret
religion is, in fact, to regret our civilization and its monuments, its
achievements, and its legacy. And in my own view, the absence of
religious faith, provided that such faith is not murderously
intolerant, can have a deleterious effect upon human character and
personality. If you empty the world of purpose, make it one of brute
fact alone, you empty it (for many people, at any rate) of reasons for
gratitude, and a sense of gratitude is necessary for both happiness and
decency. For what can soon, and all too easily, replace gratitude is a
sense of entitlement. Without gratitude, it is hard to appreciate, or
be satisfied with, what you have: and life will become an existential
shopping spree that no product satisfies.
The Elder has a short write up on Vox Day's new book that takes the atheists to task here, and he offers a linlk t othe Hitchens/D'Souza debate... Vox also provides a link to the recent D'Souza-Hitchens Debate,
where by most reliable accounts (and JB Doubtless), D'Souza batted the
aggressive atheist around like a cat toying with a helpless mouse.
Hitchens is no slouch when it comes to verbal sparring, but it sounds
like he met his match with D'Souza's well-reasoned arguments.
|
|
Last Updated on Monday, 29 October 2007 08:36 |