# What do you make of the trend in atheist proselytizing? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 3, 2007, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680 "2007-05-03T23:04:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/121 "2007-05-05T02:25:31Z")
As a person who grew up as a roman catholic, I suggest the old method. Lets burn those books. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/122 "2007-05-05T03:05:21Z")
I just bought the Hitchens book today and have already read a couple of chapters. I don’t expect that it would be taken well by people of faith, but as a nontheist, I have to admit that I’m finding it very entertaining. He’s so brazen, acerbic and witty (he has chapters with titles like “Religion Kills,” “The Metaphysical Claims of Religion Are False,” and “The Tawdriness of the Miraculous”) that it’s kind of cathartic for a non-believer. There is no pretense at diplomacy, a complete lack of giving a shit if he offends anyone and an utter directness uncouched in scientific or philosophical form. The book works great as a pure rant, and I’m finding that I’m enjoying it more than _The God Delusion_ even though Hitchens is obviously not in Dawkins’ league on some topics (evolution, science in general). I still have to read the rest of the book to determine if it really holds up as a persuasive argument, but if it was Pit rant, I’d give it an A+. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/123 "2007-05-05T03:09:16Z")
[QUOTE=Kalhoun] I’m pretty sure he came out after he was elected. [/QUOTE] Jesse Ventura was openly nontheistic and even antagonistic towards religion but still got elected Governor of Minnesota. Of course, his election was such an aberration in so many other ways that his lack of belief was kind of a drop in the bucket. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/124 "2007-05-05T03:16:13Z")
**mswas** , what books on Atheism would you say do _not_ proselytize? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/125 "2007-05-05T10:55:14Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] He’s so brazen, acerbic and witty (he has chapters with titles like “Religion Kills,” “The Metaphysical Claims of Religion Are False,” and **“The Tawdriness of the Miraculous”** ) that it’s kind of cathartic for a non-believer. [/QUOTE] That one I’ve bolded is doubly witty if you know the provenance of the word “Tawdry”. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/126 "2007-05-05T15:02:27Z")
[QUOTE=Czarcasm] **mswas** , what books on Atheism would you say do _not_ proselytize? [/QUOTE] A treatise on atheism would not be proselytizing. If the main thesis is an attack on religion and meant to garner attention as such, then I think it counts as proselytizing. I guess in a way it’s hard for an atheist book not to proselytize as it is a system of belief defined by its antagonism to another system of belief. What’s interesting about it is that atheism could not exist without theism, but true atheism cannot exist with theism. It’s kind of interesting how atheism is defined by not believing in something that does not exist. However, there is something about the way these books are framed that makes me think of them as proselytizing. The fact that they are framed as critiques of religion. **Voyager** Yes Communism was a political religion, but so is secularism. In both cases the state takes the place of deity. I think it is naive to think that the United States is any different. The Crusades had little to do with Christ’s teachings either. It had far more to do with political will and the impulse to Empire. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/127 "2007-05-05T15:10:06Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] **Voyager** Yes Communism was a political religion, but so is secularism. In both cases the state takes the place of deity. I think it is naive to think that the United States is any different. The Crusades had little to do with Christ’s teachings either. It had far more to do with political will and the impulse to Empire. [/QUOTE] I don’t see how this is true. There is no worship involved. We toss aside the government officials who do not represent the best interests of the people. We put systems in place that prevent almighty power over the people. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/128 "2007-05-05T15:11:43Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] A treatise on atheism would not be proselytizing. If the main thesis is an attack on religion and meant to garner attention as such, then I think it counts as proselytizing. I guess in a way it’s hard for an atheist book not to proselytize as it is a system of belief defined by its antagonism to another system of belief. What’s interesting about it is that atheism could not exist without theism, but true atheism cannot exist with theism. It’s kind of interesting how atheism is defined by not believing in something that does not exist. However, there is something about the way these books are framed that makes me think of them as proselytizing. The fact that they are framed as critiques of religion. [/QUOTE] So your complaint is not that these three particular books are proselytizing. Your complaint is that _all_ atheist books are proselytizing because they hold a point of view and/or provide evidence that support their point of view. Under this definition, don’t _all_ books that support a point of view proselytize? ---
**Author:** ![George\_Kaplin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3e96dc/32.png) [@George\_Kaplin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/George_Kaplin)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/129 "2007-05-05T15:12:48Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Voyager Yes Communism was a political religion, but so is secularism. In both cases the state takes the place of deity. Secularism doesn’t necessitate the existence of a State. I’m sure there are a great many secular anarchists who could back me up on that. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/130 "2007-05-05T15:16:59Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] Yes Communism was a political religion, but so is secularism. In both cases the state takes the place of deity. I think it is naive to think that the United States is any different. The Crusades had little to do with Christ’s teachings either. It had far more to do with political will and the impulse to Empire. [/QUOTE] You do realize that Communism was a bit more than just state-sponsored atheism, don’t you? I would appreciate it if you would stop equating one with the other. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/131 "2007-05-05T15:22:15Z")
[QUOTE=George Kaplin] Secularism doesn’t necessitate the existence of a State. I’m sure there are a great many secular anarchists who could back me up on that. [/QUOTE] That is an oxymoron. Secularism specifically relates to state control. Without a state secularism is meaningless. It has to do with the level of theocratic control vs secular control. There is no such thing as a secular anarchist. However, there is a lot to be said about the the worship of the state. I don’t really want to digress into a discussion of Hegelians vs Marxists during the cold war here in this thread. My point is that the state fills the role of the important ideal around which social cohesion is built when a God or Priesthood does not fulfill that function. **Czarcasm** You still seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that I am complaining about the existence of these books. All books intended to espouse one ideology over another are proselytizing. A book on say, how to repair your house isn’t proselytizing. A book explaining Plato’s thought is not proselytizing. A book proposing that one point of view is superior to another, is proselytizing. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/132 "2007-05-05T15:28:41Z")
Why would anyone write a book proposing a point of view unless they thought it was a _superior_ point of view? Therefore, all books with points of view are, by your definition, proselytizing. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/133 "2007-05-05T15:28:54Z")
[QUOTE=Valteron] Think about that for a second. Almost half of Estonians say they do not believe in God, but only 11% say they are atheists! What the Hell does that mean? What are the 38% who do not identify as atheists? What are they, theists who do not believe in God??? :confused 😕 To me, it is a bit like who women preface their remarks with "I am no feminist, but. . . . . . " and then who go on to espouse fully feminist positions. So why are they not willing to call themselves feminists since they clearly are? Because they have heard that word so bad-mothed and denigrated that they believe it means “a screaming, man-hating, ball-busting, fanatical, nose-hair-braiding bitch with unshaven legs and body odour”. Similarly, God knows (no pun intended) what negative ideas people associate with “atheist”. [/QUOTE] I don’t believe in Santa Claus, but I don’t identify as an ‘aclausist’. Identifying as an atheist may not make sense if theism is not viewed as the default position in your society. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/134 "2007-05-05T15:30:42Z")
[QUOTE=DanBlather] I don’t believe in Santa Claus, but I don’t identify as an ‘aclausist’. Identifying as an atheist may not make sense if theism is not viewed as the default position in your society. [/QUOTE] Yeah, the way the frame of the debate is dominated is a very interesting subject to me. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/135 "2007-05-05T15:32:00Z")
**mswas** , [which of these definitions](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/proselytize) are you using for “proselytize”? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/136 "2007-05-05T15:33:41Z")
pros·e·lyt·ize /ˈprɒsəlɪˌtaɪz/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pros-uh-li-tahyz] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object), verb (used without object), -ized, -iz·ing. to convert or attempt to convert as a proselyte; recruit. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/137 "2007-05-05T15:35:01Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] pros·e·lyt·ize /ˈprɒsəlɪˌtaɪz/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pros-uh-li-tahyz] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object), verb (used without object), -ized, -iz·ing. to convert or attempt to convert as a proselyte; recruit. [/QUOTE] And you think merely presenting a point of view qualifies? ---
**Author:** ![George\_Kaplin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3e96dc/32.png) [@George\_Kaplin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/George_Kaplin)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/138 "2007-05-05T15:41:08Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > That is an oxymoron. Secularism specifically relates to state control. Without a state secularism is meaningless. It has to do with the level of theocratic control vs secular control. There is no such thing as a secular anarchist. What does ‘control’ have to do with anything. Control over what? Any society which has dispensed with religion can accurately be called ‘Secular’, and not every society need be governed by a State. If a thousand atheist anarcho-syndicalists decided to set up a commune somewhere, why couldn’t their society be described as secular? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/139 "2007-05-05T15:42:44Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] I guess in a way it’s hard for an atheist book not to proselytize as it is a system of belief defined by its antagonism to another system of belief. [/quote] Atheism is not a belief and is not dfined by antagonism towards any other belief. Atheism is a _lack_ of a _particular_ belief. > [@](#): > > What’s interesting about it is that atheism could not exist without theism This is a strange assertion. The absence of theism IS atheism, by definition. > [@](#): > > but true atheism cannot exist with theism Sure it can – and does. The problem tends to be that theists are often not willing to coexist with atheists or even with other theists who don’t believe exactly as they do. I’ll quote from _God is not Great_: > [@](#): > > I have probably sat up later, and longer, with religious friends than with any other kind. These friends often irritate me by saying that I am a “seeker,” which I am not, or not in the way they think…When I go to the mosque, I take off my shoes. When I go to the synagogogue, I cover my head. I once even observed the etiquette of an ashram in India, though this was a trial to me…I would not prohibit [religion] even if I thought I could. Very generous of me, you may say. But will the rligious grant me the same indulgence? I ask because there is a real and serious difference between me and my religious friends, and the real and serious friends are sufficiently honest enough to admit it. I would be quite content to go to their children’s bar mitzvahs, to marvel at their Gothic cathedrals, to “respect” their belief that the Koran was dictated, though exclusively in Arabic, to an illiterate merchant or to interest myself in Wicca and Hindu and Jain consolations. And as it happens, I will continue to do this without insisting on the polite reciprocal condition – which is _that they in turn leave me alone_. But this, religion is ultimately incapable of doing. Incidentally, what do you mean by “true” atheism? “True” as opposed to what? > [@](#): > > It’s kind of interesting how atheism is defined by not believing in something that does not exist. It’s defined as a lack of positive belief in something which may or may not exist. The non-existence of God is not a necesary condition for atheists to exist. > [@](#): > > However, there is something about the way these books are framed that makes me think of them as proselytizing. The fact that they are framed as critiques of religion. They are formed as critiques of arguments for the existence of gods, but how else are they supposed to frame them? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2007, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680/140 "2007-05-05T15:43:48Z")
[QUOTE=Czarcasm] And you think merely presenting a point of view qualifies? [/QUOTE] No, I think the attempt to win converts is essential. However, to head this off at the pass. I think these books qualify as such an attempt by their nature as critiques on religion. However, as much fun as travelling this Moebius strip has been, this is my stop. Agree or don’t, I have bored of the semantics of proselytization. I think that there is an implicit emotional reaction many atheists have toward the notion of proselytization and judge it as an epithet. I judge it as merely an attempt to win converts to your way of thinking. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-you-make-of-the-trend-in-atheist-proselytizing/402680.md?page=8)