July 06, 2012

Gnu Atheism and political illogic

There is ZERO logical connection between atheist metaphysical stances and political leanings; i.e., there is no logical reason that an atheist can't also be a conservative. Why Gnu Atheist types in particular either can't or else refuse to grasp this idea, I'm not sure. That said, it makes me want to keep even more distance from the typical atheist evangelist. (And yes, Gnus, that's pretty much how I see many of you.)

Reality? Atheist Nexus has a conservative atheist group. Other, similar groups exist. The New York Times had a story about conservative atheists. And, per the NYT, Ayn Rand is not necessarily a patron saint for conservative atheists.

And, in the case of the person who seems to have some Gnu Atheists' dander particularly high right now? Per S.E. Cupp (true, I pronounce her name in my mind as "Suck-Up") one can even be an atheist and work for Faux News.

Now, if we were talking about secular humanism, which is a political philosophy in a way that atheism in general and Gnu Atheism in particular isn't, I would listen to the parallel argument more closely. At a minimum, I think it's hard to be a political conservative and a secular humanist.

That said, incidents at places like Center for Free Inquiry indicate what Gnu Atheists think of secular humanism, and some of its icons.

But, when you're the likes of P.Z. Myers at Freethought Blogs and want "cadres," the narrower the mental field, the easier the cadre formation. Of course, I've blogged about related issues before, including his claim that people like Sam Harris aren't conservatives and that he would like to read conservatives out of modern atheism.

Beyond that, the fact that hundreds of millions of Buddhists are atheists and religious show that many Gnu Atheists need to learn more about precision in language to go hand in hand with logical skills.

I suggest a little Wittgenstein? 

OR a little Gilbert Ryle. (That includes you, Mr. Gilbert Ryle student Dan Dennett.) Gnus are continually making category mistakes.

No comments: