New Atheism - Dawkins

What does Dawkins argue?

religion involves blind trust (faith) , in the absence of evidence and even in the teeth of evidence

what is faith described as?

intellectually irresponsible

What does Dawkins argue regarding the God delusion?

argues that religious people are non-thinking. Christian and Muslim children re brought up t believe unquestionably. Belief in God is forced upon children and so should be rejected

What is believing in God akin to?

beleiiving in Santa or th eTooth fairy - you grow out of it

What does this non-thinking lead to?

Fanaticism

What dies religion provide?

th climate in which extremism flourishes. Religion is to blame for the death of those in 9/11 not just religious extremism

what does Dawkins say about religion?

Religion presents ‘a poky little medieval universe , and extremely limited’. Whereas , science offers grand , beautiful and an awe-inspiring universe

What view does New Atheism provide?

a materialists world-outlook , where theories are based on evidence

What do New Atheists see blind faith in holy books?

axiomatic for religions. If the book is truw and the evidence seems to contradict it , then the evidence , rather than the book , needs to be thrown out

What does Dawkins argue about when a science book is wrong?

soemome eventually discovers the mistake and corrects it for future textbooks. This is not the case with holy books

How does religion impede scientific progress?

it teaches us not to change our minds

List the scientists who have a faith and provide contributions to science?

• Michael Faraday

• Karl Landsteiner

• Gregory Mendel

• Robert Bogle

What does this suggest about the New Atheists claim about the incompatibility of religion and science?

science and religion can coexist , as seen by the scientists who held a strong faith to religion

who is Alister Mcgrath?

He is a theologion who converted from Christianity to Atheism after his involvement in science

What does Mcgrath argue?

there are many people who convert to religious faith as adults and cannot be said to be clinging onto beliefs from their childhood

What does Mcgrath point out?

science abd religion can coexist ; it is just seeing the world through a different lens

How has Francis Collins defended Christianity?

he wrote a book called ‘the language of god’ in 2007 in which he explained how he found that the scientific discoveries he was making confirmed his faith and showed how they can coexist

What was Polkinghorne’s argument in support of faith?

the more ehe learned about the physical world , the deeper his faith became

What is fundamentalistm?

Refers to people who have a strictly literalist approach to sacred texts and belief systems

What do Fundamentalist Christians believe in?

the world was create exactly as described in Genesis , and that the teachings of the Bible should be taken at face value rather than interpreted as a myth

How have they responded to the New Atheistic challenges?

they argue that the truth of the Bible is al;ways going to stand and scientists who must be wrong because the Bible come from God and science comes from fallible human minds

what is an apologist?

they speak in defence of a belief system , in this case , religion

what analogy did Desmond Tutu use?

gave the analogy that religion is like a knife. In the wrong hands , it can be a murderous weapon used in hatred and to threaten; but when it is used properly , it can cut bread to feed the hungry

What is the purpose of this analogy?

it is to say that religion is not the problem itself

How can New Atheists be accused of the Strawman fallacy?

the New Atheists have a tendency to criticise Christian believers as if they all reject evolution and have a literal view of the bible, and they criticise Islam as if all Muslims are terrorist extremists, this is not the case

What has the response of of Ward been?

points out the good that religion has done over the centuries , and argues that human society would be considerably worse off without it. Hea argued that religious belief is not in fact contradictory, but can be held by rational thinking human beings

What does polkinghorne argue?

different levels of explanation need weaving together to provide a rich and comprehensive whole

What is an example of this?

Science may describe the Big Bangh and the evolving of living creatures. Whereas, religion can speak of God bringing the world into existence and directing it towards the outcome

what do these two accounts do?

Supplement each other rather than contradict each other

What does Mcgrath argue?

evidence and belief in religion is akin to evidence and belief in the natural sciences. Both involve showing there are good reasons for thinking something is right, without having total confirmation

What does Dawkins fail to do?

make the distinction between ‘total absence of supporting evidence’ and the ‘absence of totally supporting evidence’