Ritröð Guðfræðistofnunar - 01.09.2008, Blaðsíða 25

how anyone else saw it. The opposite of “bright” is “dim”, a mildly offensive
word that translates as “stupid”. By choosing to use the label “bright”,
atheists were widely seen to be claiming to be smarter than everyone else.
As ABC’s commentator John AJlen Paulos remarked, “I don’t think a degree
in public relations is needed to expect that many people will construe the
term as smug, ridiculous, and arrogant”.25 My concern, however, is not
the arrogance or foolishness of the “New Atheism” at this point, but its
fundamentally divisive nature. This crude belief system divides the world
between the “brights” and the “dims”, creating a damaging polarity which
the “New Atheism” asserts is the characteristic of religion. Atheism, it
seems, is just as bad, having now added intellectual snobbery to its vices,
and nothing obvious to its virtues.
Conclusion: On being realistic
Michael Shermer, President of the Skeptics Society, made the significant
point that religions were implicated in some human tragedies, such as holy
wars. While rightly criticising these - which I gladly endorse - Shermer
goes on to emphasize that there is clearly a significant positive side to
religion:26
However, for every one of these grand tragedies there are ten thousand
acts of personal kindness and social good that go unreported. . . . Religion,
like all social institutions of such historical depth and cultural impact,
cannot be reduced to an unambiguous good or evil.
Yet the pejorative and hostile attitude towards religion on the part of the
“New Atheism” asserts that it is a universal, unambiguous evil, which is a
dangerous threat to civilization. Yet just where is the balanced and judicious
analysis that Shermer rightly demands? Why is it so conspicuously absent?
I fear the answer is simple: because it doesn’t make for the slick and simple
soundbites that will reassure the godless faithful at a time of religious
resurgence. The belief that religion poisons everything is simply childish.
25 Chris Mooney, “Not too ‘bright’”: Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett are smart guys, but
their campaign to rename religious unbelievers Brights could use some rethinking.” Skeptical
Inquirer March-April 2004.
26 Michael Shermer, How we believe : Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God. New York:
Freeman, 2000, 71.
23