Recently, I watched a video of David Mills talking on why he believed a new "Golden Age of Atheism" was beginning to unfold in America. I happen to agree that this is the case, but my thoughts are a little different than David's.
What exactly would it mean to have a new Golden Age of Atheism? I do not think either Mr. Mills or myself expects to see religion in this country withering away; instead, we think, atheism will become much more "mainstream".
The original "Golden Age of Freethought" was from the late second half of the 19th century to roughly 1929, and is characterized as such because various forms of unbelief were widely held (compared to now) and considered acceptable. The most popular public speaker in the age just before radio was "The Great Agnostic", Robert G. Ingersoll. My own openly-atheist great-grandfather was a pioneer Kansas farmer who participated in public debates and was highly-regarded for his public service in organizing the local school district, laying out public roads, etc.
For myself, I think we have a reasonable chance to achieve the following:
- a significant increase in the percentage of people labeling themselves as atheist
- greater acceptance of atheist ideas
- lessened discrimination against atheists
Here are the reasons David Mills thinks a period is returning where atheism would be both more prevalent, and acceptable:
1. Advent of communication technology (internet)
2. A proliferation of atheist-centered books Dennet, Dawkins, Harris and others)
3. Progression of science (less "gaps" for God)
4. Failure of creation science and ID
5. Even believers are abandoning biblical literalism
6. Public disgust with god-driven politics
7. Reduced tolerance for discrimination of all sorts
8. Parallels between Muslim and Christian fundamentalism
9. More people are seeking higher education
10. Many biblical scholars are beginning to see that Jesus never existed.
Clearly, the advent of the internet and related technology (#1) amounts to a incredible set of tools for a dispersed community such as ours. Many younger non-believers cannot imagine the isolation that almost all atheists dealt with routinely until relatively recently. The ability to post text and pictures as well as audio and video, and to search for exactly what you want is incredibly powerful. Now, an atheist should have no trouble finding those like-minded, and communication with other atheists is suddenly easy and cheap.
The surprising sales of atheist books (#2) is perhaps more symptom than cause of the change we are witnessing. Mr. Mills correctly points out that high quality atheist books were rare in the not too distant past, and he mentions two that influenced many of us "old-timers"; Bertrand Russell's "Why I am not a Christian" and George Smith's "The Case Against God". Whatever the cause, I am savoring the new atheist works, and am pleased that, for once, millions of Americans are reading what I am reading.Personally, I enjoy the clear and direct style of "Letter to a Christian Nation" and the thought-provoking scholarship of "Breaking the Spell". I am in the middle of "The God Delusion", and loving every page. The arguments being presented in all these works are rational, clear and persuasive, and I can't help but think they will make a difference for those who give them a chance.
I disagree about the impact of scientific gains (#3), and the failure of creationism and ID (#4). Science is doing just fine, but we should never underestimate the ability of the hard core faith community to label anything scientific as part of an alternative and false religion. And creationism is alive and well in the literalist community.
And I don't see a rush to liberal religion (#5) in my neighborhood. Yes, there are liberal churches doing well, but conservative churches do a fabulous recruiting job. ( I've seen them in action!) Liberal religion may reject a literal interpretation of scripture, but they don't reject the Bible. In a sense, they may even function as "gateway" religion (remember gateway drugs?) that set people up for Fundamentalism. For example, suppose you are a young person raised in a liberal Christian church, and a friend you think highly of confronts you with a statement like "Do you believe the Bible is true?"
If you don't believe the Bible is true, why call yourself a Christian? I mean, how could you possibly tell which parts are true and which are not. But if you believe the Bible is true, literally true, then you belong in a different church. Right?
I do, however, agree that the last few years have given Americans a taste of what God-driven politics (#6) looks like, and even many deeply religious citizens are dismayed. Stem cell research was derailed and Iraq invaded by men listening to God's whispers in their ears.
Discrimination and bigotry does seem to be on the decline (#7). However, most atheists are aware that Americans now hold atheists in less regard than Muslims or virtually anyone else. I think this will begin to change as non-believers become more visible and, I hope, accepted. We'll see.
The similarities between Christian and Muslim fundamentalism (#8) are certainly apparent to atheists, and I can't help but hope that others are waking up to this as well. The constant calls to faith after 9/11 were not promising, but there has been much time for reflection since then. Some of us are making the connection that the war we are fighting is not with "terrorism" but political Islam, another set of religious literalists who are willing and even eager to kill us should we be unwilling to convert to their way of thinking.
Is it true that a higher proportion of Americans are seeking a higher education (#9)? If so, that's certainly a good thing, and we have all heard that religious intensity correlates with lack of education. On the other hand, I don't think America is educating itself out of religion.
Perhaps biblical scholars are coming to think that Jesus did not exist (#10). I know that many atheists would agree with this conclusion, and seem to put a lot of stock in the persuasiveness of the idea of a non-existent messiah. But while I have heard this idea frequently from other atheists, I have yet to be convinced that any concensus exists on the part of serious researchers.
To me, it doesn't matter. If Jesus did not exist, then Christianity is not true. If Jesus did exist, he was not God on earth, and Christianity is not true. I almost prefer the way it plays out if Jesus existed, lived and taught a message that held some measure of wisdom which bears no resemblance at all to modern or historical Christianity. But then, irony appeals to me.
So there we have David Mills' 10 reasons why America is approaching a Golden Age of Atheism. Let me add a couple of things I think might contribute to this development.
Scholars have pointed out that demise of the original "Golden Age" coincided with rising public fear generated by "godless communism" and the rise of the Soviet Union. Within a few decades of the Bolshevik revolution in 1917, Americans were fiercely rallying to religion, and it was soon no longer publicly acceptable to openly doubt religious tenets.
So I would add that the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union as a condition making the greater acceptance of atheism possible in America. On top of that, the new enemy we face is not characterized by godlessness, but godliness, in a particularly nasty incarnation. Do we fight them by being more religious? I think the answer Americans are coming to accept is "No".
And normally, I would not think religious scandals would have much influence; they're sort of always there in the background. But consider the long running and intense scandal that rocked the Catholic church beginning in the 90's, with story after shocking story released week after week for years. I wonder if this one might have been big enough, and gone on long enough to actually cause some to question the moral authority if not the truth of Catholicism, Christianity, or religion in general.Finally, consider that a mere ten years ago, the most hated person in America was an atheist, Madalyn O'Hair. Many non-believers just could not stomach joining a movement led by such a profane and angry person. The "new" atheism is just as assertive, but much more reasonable, democratic, and positive. My friend Matt Dillahunty was written up in the local paper as preaching a "gospel" of atheism; he embraces the phrase, as gospel means "good news", and the truth of atheism IS good news.
bfa
