TED Conversations

Nicholas Lukowiak


This conversation is closed.

New Age Atheism: The New Frontier of Scientific Ideology

There is criteria which one should follow in order to be a neoatheist:

*Understanding science, religion, supernatural and atheism
~Science is trying to figure out what is true through methods of logic and rationality, while religion does the same thing but through dogmas and old scriptures.
~Supernatural is the silly notion things cannot be explained by science but religion, and sometimes pseudoscience (which is fake science).
~Atheism is the lack of belief in deities
~Religions are the enemy. Buddhism gets a pass because they are hardly a religion - more of a philosophy.

*Make sure to know proper arguments to distinguish atheism from religion:
~"So by the lack of belief in God, I have a belief? So my lack of belief in Santa Claus is "Aclausian?"
~"Is being bold, a hairstyle?"
~"The television being off, a channel?"

*Check out Dawkins, Rosenberg, Dennet and Harris:
~These guys pave the way for what it is be a rational, logical and non-dogmatic person.
~They demonstrate how belief in a God is just nonsensical through science!
~They prove logic is EVERYTHING to how to think properly.

*Being militant does not mean physical actions
~Only extremist harm others for their beliefs, and since we have none there is no need for violence.
~Never allow 'faith' to be an acceptable reason for the other person to avoid an argument.
~Don't be afraid to debate, you are right! Religion is a destructive practice!
~The burden of proof is on those who claim truth!

Always keep in mind something a leader of our movement had to say, which proves powerful:

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
-Christopher Hitchens

Let's how a strong discussion here on what it REALLY means to be the neoatheist everyone should be!

As an active blogger and forum user to discuss new age atheism, there are a couple of websites I can share. Once a week we have a podcast for lectures with live commenting! Join in the movement!



Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Feb 2 2013: I, like some others below, am confused from your explanation as to what New Age Atheism is. Do I understand that it is a sort of evangelical effort or campaign to use science to disprove the existence of any diety rather than assuming, as most trained scientists do, that science cannot prove or disprove beliefs in that area? And that there is a set of particular arguments you are coached to use with people?

    As you mention pseudoscience, it sounds like the movement also doesn't go for for invalid extrapolations of real science to justify all sorts of stuff? (But then, followers never think their extrapolations are not scientifically valid, so I guess that's a tough one to pin down).
    • thumb
      Feb 7 2013: Just trying to get people to think Fritz,

      I am obviously no neoatheist lol - basically just claiming the movement to be a disorganized religion. Which is going to get a lot of people either angry or thinking or both. :-D

      • Feb 10 2013: Describing Atheism or your term "Neoatheism" as religion is silly. Religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

        Are you not editing your own personal dictionary to serve your own special needs?
        • thumb
          Feb 10 2013: Disorganized religion differs from a full blown tax exemption religion.

          Mormons were disorganized for the longest time, a cult, yet through massive numbers of members became a recognized religious practice. Scientology, no different.

          By your definition of religion, indeed the neoatheist movement is not a religious movement.

          But your definition of religion cuts out a lot of organized religions that exist today. Since there are atheist (or secular) Jews, Christians, Muslims. Buddhism, Hinduism sects, and the subreligious groups which are inspired by the two religions, exist. No superhuman beliefs, but, in fact very organized.

          If anything, part of the neoatheist movement (the one you seem to have been submitted to) has gone about changing the definitions and ideas of religion to satisfy argument.

          While I say religion involves: dogmas, community, consensus, charity, doctrine, beliefs, faiths, etc, etc.

          You're saying religion is all about a higher power - which it's not. Your impressions of religion have became that, no doubt due to the strong Christian image developed in the media today.

          Today, when I think 'atheist' I don't actually think of anything universal or global in terms of what that group of people are rejecting, I think they are just rejecting the Judea-God and have labeled anything relative, religious.

          In short, no. In fact I am trying to keep my definition as open as possible, and by doing so - recognize how neoatheist are no doubt, moving towards a unified, organized culture and community - which already exist, but not very 'organized'.

          I assume by your response, you are a new age atheist? Maybe even on to label themselves 'agnostic-atheist' in order to accommodate the .01 percent chance the Judea-God exist? Fine.

          Yet, there is this itching feeling that comes to me, when people place themselves into a debate about a creator God; discussing metaphysical ideologies. Strikingly similar to a religious debate. Not a religion? Yet have a say?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.