Salty Current has penned a very lolzy guide for believers and accommodationists, “How to write about Gnu atheists.” A short excerpt:
Similarly, gnu atheism shouldn’t be presented as an intellectual position. Repeatedly emphasize their hostility to organized religion as the source of their disbelief. It helps if you acknowledge that there are some legitimate reasons for this hostility – shows you to be fair and balanced while leaving aside those pesky ontological matters.
You’re also safe presenting gnu atheists as cold, hyper-rational, solitary automatons who lack an appreciation of beauty or sense of wonder. Pay no attention to those who are artists, writers, or musicians, or to any of their works describing the wonder of scientific understanding and the sense of cosmic connectedness that follows from this deeper empirical knowledge. Leave aside the enormous spectrum of atheist writing on any number of ethical issues. And no need to discuss gnu atheists as people with families, friends, and communities. There’s nothing dishonest about this. You’re writing about that one dimension that is the guiding focus of their lives: rejecting religion. . .
Remember: this is about gnu atheists. The focus should be on them. Questions concerning the existence of deities or the epistemic status of religious beliefs are vulgar and hurtful.
h/t: JJE
Yes, but what about the neoteric, state-of-the-art, and ultramodern atheist?
I’m afraid to google salty current.
Admit the truth. Your dreams are haunted by the most oceanographic eroticism. You will never be free until you embrace your desire.
I’m an neo-apophatic (aka gnu Apophatic) atheist. My disbelief is so vague and mysterious it can hardly be described, nevermind detected and criticized.
Pro Tip: SC is not a white male, no matter how hard you try.
Some people have to learn this the hard way.
Dang it, I meant to reply to STVSs comment 😛
I particularly liked the “fair and balanced” reference.
Nice article. They may find it useful that any article criticizing the Gnu Atheists can be quantified using the Dawkins Dis Index, described here:
http://dofang.tumblr.com/post/1163143354/introducing-the-dawkins-dis-index-ddi
Love it, especially the last paragraph about Templeton grantees.
My blurb would be:
A manual of style? Well, of course. Makes perfect sense. After all, Gnu Atheist bashing is a genre unto itself. This will undoubtedly be the go-to reference for every Gnu Disser from Robert Wright to Ben Stein!
Way to go SC! Can you add the need to emphasize that atheism=religion because clouds are pretty or something?
Look at the trees!
Thanks, all. I appreciate the link and the positive comments.
You have to get dinosaurs into the mix somehow… any suggestions?
Yeah, what are those accommodationists like, always talking misrepresenting their opposers with closed-minded, ultra-negative stereotypes like that?
Honestly.
Please ignore the word ‘talking’.