09.22.08
Weinberg on atheism
Weinberg article at NYRB, Without God
In the New Atheism vein, and this spiel is getting tiresome, if I may say so.
I can reiterate what a bit of what was said here hundreds of times during the roll out of the Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens books. The question of atheism in and of itself is one thing, the antithesis to a theistic affirmation. But what comes with the package is as problematical as what comes with the theistic package: reductionism, Darwinism abused to create metaphysical certainties, myths about religious myths. I have urged scientists to stop their naive takes on religion, cloned Bertrand Russell atheism. The expose of religious beliefs is all very well, but scientists aren’t even good at doing that. And the blanket rubric, ‘religion’, cannot easily be attacked with a single line of argument.
Thus Weinberg simply goes astray with his one paragraph dismissal of Buddhism. How is such a pastiche possible in such a brilliant physicist?
The current platform of scientism attacking religion has rendered itself incompetent at its own task, even as an immensely complex period of religious transition is underway. The scientific take is so lacking in so much as basic historical study that it threatens to strengthen the very thing it attempts to critique.
Samuel Skinner said,
September 23, 2008 at 1:36 am
The rebuttal for religion is very simple- all religions require faith. Faith is not a good way to understand reality.
Also, please explain:
“reductionism, Darwinism abused to create metaphysical certainties,”
I am aware that naturalism implies determinism- but that is a fact of reality. We have to live with it. Darwinism only implies that the natural world REALLY sucks.