Edger scores a bullseye, destined to go up on doors everywhere, as a test to see how many seconds it takes for the godbots to tear it down. It’s a razor sharp stiletto, straight to the Sacred Aorta.
How to Criticize the “New Atheists:” a seven step guide to writing the perfect reactionary hissy-fit is a masterpiece of ridicule, directed to the sad, bitter, anachronistic remnants of what was once a proud, Medieval empire of terror, torture and repression.
“1. Ride those coattails. Remember, the New Atheists may be evil and hell-bound, but they are also your ticket to fame! Just make sure you drop all the right names in the title of your book and you are on the road to a career in reactionary tantrums.”
This in particular got my attention. I always wondered about those books, where the author’s entire gambit is to tear down someone else’s rational argument without offering anything constructive or cogent in response. Perhaps if they had an argument that could stand on its own merits, the reactionary name-dropping wouldn’t be necessary…
“2. Snub them for not taking time to disprove God’s existence, ignoring your own failure to prove God’s existence. Several reviews of and responses to Hitchens in particular, as well as Harris and Dennett, contained some snide little attack about how none of these three atheists took the time out to properly address the arguments for the existence of Zeus/Demeter/Allah/Republican-Jesus/God.”
Whew. I was afraid they were about to disprove Dionysus. He’s my hero.
“3. Remember, the New Atheists failed to write a multi-volume complete summary of the entire history of Western theology, so they’re “ignorant of the finer points of religion.” One frequent criticism of the New Atheists is that, even if they claim to be targeting religious belief, they are avoiding the totally relevant and politically impotent/important field of highbrow theological writing. Because, unlike you, the New Atheists have not taken the decades of study required to lodge yourself in an obscure niche of your religion’s ivory tower to which nobody listens except the others trapped in the same nitch, you are understandably infuriated that Hitchens never once mentions Eric Rust’s clever interpretation of Tillich’s commentary on the epistemology of empiricism as applied to the miraculous, or that Harris never even bothers to set himself against every single sentence of The City of God.”
But what about all the great self-loathing anti-wisdom of Peter, Paul, Augustine, Aquinas, etc…. phenomenal minds wasted writing fan fiction to their favorite ghost stories, living in squalor because they were too stupid to remember how to build Roman-engineered indoor plumbing, central heating and roads, and who didn’t understand even to wash their hands between a bowel movement and tucking into their gruel.
“5. Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao.”
Still and all, their theo-programming is pretty good. They spit this one out, verbatim, at the drop of a miter.
“7. And if all else fails, you can always say that atheists “just don’t get it.” They haven’t had the divine, transcendent experiences you’ve had about Jesus, or Mohammed, or the Buddha, or David Koresh, or Sai Baba, or the UFO hiding behind the comet, or whatever.”
Or acid, for that matter. But then they’d just go on and on about talking cats and demons …. oh, wait.