Greg Krehbiel
Neurological reductionism, atheists as fundamentalists, Cindy Sheehan and health care costs, briefly noted
by Greg Krehbiel on 1 September 2009
+ In More than meets the MRI Roger Scruton says all the reductionist efforts to “explain” humans by reference to which part of the brain lights up are missing the point.
+ From time to time I read statements to the effect that an atheist is just a fundamentalist in different clothing. This article — How to answer the New Atheists without words — is the best attempt I’ve seen at explaining that perspective. Not that I endorse it, it’s just the best I’ve seen recently.
+ Cindy Sheehan is learning that when you protest Bush, that’s big news, but when you protest Obama, the media yawns. Of course it’s also possible people are just sick of her.
+ An editorial on IBD (one of my new favorite sites) says if you want to cut health costs, put the patient in charge.
2009-09-01 » Greg Krehbiel
1 September 2009 @ 7:31 pm
I think Cindy Sheehan was old news a few years ago. I had to think a little while to remember who she is.
1 September 2009 @ 9:33 pm
I assume you mean statements to the effective that aggressive atheists are just fundamentalists in different clothing. I mean, someone out there somewhere has probably claimed that “atheism = fundamentalism,” but the take I’ve heard on it refers to atheists of a certain stripe, not any guy of any sort who self-consciously refuses to affirm the existence of God.
1 September 2009 @ 10:08 pm
Pentamon,
Why do you pick a particular class of atheist but not a particular class of fundamentalist?
2 September 2009 @ 1:22 pm
I’m not sure there are “classes” of fundamentalists that are more or less like fundamentalists, but there are classes of atheists that are more or less like fundamentalists. Make sense?
2 September 2009 @ 1:26 pm
I see what you’re getting at, but ISTM there are classes of atheists who are more or less like certain classes of fundamentalists.
2 September 2009 @ 4:01 pm
I would think that an atheist who is unwilling to entertain the possibility of the supernatural, as opposed to one who is unimpressed with the supposed evidence, could be reasonably referred to as a fundamentalist.
For instance, certain things that are considered by some to be evidence of divine providence could simply be coincidence. But if you found an image code in the digits of pi that translated into an image of a circle (a la Sagan’s Contact) it would not be reasonable to call that a coincidence.
But usually it’s just a weak riposte, like the silly “It takes more faith to ‘believe in’ evolution than to believe in God.”
“All you atheists are just a different kind of fundamentalist” sounds a lot like “You’re ugly and your mother dresses you funny.”
2 September 2009 @ 4:21 pm
You’re right on both counts — that an a priori rejection of the supernatural is like fundamentalism, and that often such charges are just cuss words.
Mark Shea frequently uses the phrase “scratch an atheist find a fundamentalist” on his blog. Sometimes it’s hard to get the connection, but often he means to say that many atheists want to portray issues in black and white terms, like here … http://markshea.blogspot.com/2003/09/scratch-atheist-find-fundamentalist.html
2 September 2009 @ 4:58 pm
Well, I guess I was thinking that the basis of the comparison is what makes a fundamentalist a fundamentalist, not some ancillary attributes that some fundamentalists have, and others don’t.
For example, it’s reasonable to say “short bearded Irish men are like leprechauns” because being short, bearded, and Irish is part of what makes a leprechaun a leprechaun. You wouldn’t say “short bearded Irish men are like SOME leprechauns.” So I was thinking that “some atheists are like fundamentalists” is similar — those atheists who view their belief system in the way that fundamentalists by definition view their belief system, are “like fundamentalists.” But while all fundamentalists view their belief system like fundamentalists do, not all atheists do. And I’ve never heard anyone claim that ALL atheists view their belief system the all fundamentalists by definition view their belief system. The closest I’ve seen is a generalization within a context that pretty clear indicates that specific behaviors, which are not universal among atheists, are in view.
But maybe I just don’t get around enough.