Who are the Four (Atheist) Horsemen of the (Non) Apocalypse? | New Atheism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лис 2023
- A brief description of the "New Atheists" that are described as the four horsemen of the non apocalypse: Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett, as well as a short description of the books they published in the heyday of the New Atheism movement (The End of Faith, The God Delusion, God is Not Great, and Breaking the Spell).
Sponsors: NBA_Ruby, Antybodi, Federico Galvão, Mike Gloudemans, Andy Capone, Andreas Froestl, The Jack Bancroft, Jakey, Andrew Sullivan, Eugene SY, Tyler James, Antoinemp1, Dennis Sexton, Joao Sa, Joshua Furman, SirSpammenot Multitude, Ploney, Avatar, Diéssica, GhostlyYorick, Hendrick McDonald, horace chan, Will DeRousse, Star Gazer, Paul Linkogle, Julian Seidl, Doǧan Çetin, Thomas Kristic, Panos Tsivi, Jesse Willette and Daniel West. Thanks for your support on Patreon! If you want to become a patron, follow this link: / carneades
Here are some videos you might enjoy:
The 100 Days of Logic ( • 100 Days of Logic (Full) )
History of Philosophy ( • Four Weeks of Famous P... )
Ancient Philosophers & Zeno’s Paradoxes ( • Schools of Ancient Gre... )
ExPhi Experimental Philosophy ( / @experimentalphilosoph... )
Map of Philosophy ( • The Map Of Philosophy )
More videos with Carneades ( / @carneadesofcyrene )
Philosophy by Topic:
Epistemology: • Epistemology
Metaphysics: • Metaphysics
Political Philosophy: • Political Philosophy
Philosophy of Religion: • Philosophy of Religion
Ancient Philosophy: • Ancient Philosophy
Philosophy of Science: • Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Language: • Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Art/Aesthetics: • Philosophy of Art (Aes...
Buy stuff with Zazzle: www.zazzle.com/store/carneade...
Follow us on Twitter: @CarneadesCyrene / carneadescyrene
Information for this video gathered from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Collier-MacMillan Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Dictionary of Continental Philosophy, and more! #NewAtheism
Atheist, - for like 10 years - here.
There was a period in my life where I had left religion, cause it did not make any rational sense to me anymore, but was unsure of what to identify myself with. It was because of people like Dawkins that I was finally able to identify myself as an atheist. They may be a bit forceful or even obnoxious, but they helped me breakthrough my preconceived notions of atheism.
I read all 4 of the New Atheist books, or at least started reading them, I don't think I made it all the way through all of them. I had already been an atheist for maybe 5 years at that point though.
While I agree with the goal of countering or at least softening Christian Nationalism in the USA, I don't think their tactics were very effective. I'd argue that although the % of Christians has gone down in the U.S. the ones that are left have become more radical, desperate, and bold since the mid-2000s.
I will take induction and underdetermination over dogma any day.
Induction is a dogma, from an atheist point of view
But, that is academic dogmatism.
@@thomaslodger7675 dogmatism is something that is only based on authority with no evidence
@@InventiveHarvest philosophically that isn't how it's defined. Pyrrhonian skepticism was doubt of everything, academic skepticism was doubt of dogmatic principles (sextus rmpiricus). Basically dogmatism would be accepting science as the only form of reason regarding the world without questioning it and blindly accepting it. Academic skeptics wouldn't "deny" science but label it as "very strong" not stating that it is one and only objective way to look at things. Hope this helps.
@@InventiveHarvestI invite you to the religion of Islam.
Great video on New Atheism, Carneades! I have read Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" in its entirety - and quite thoroughly at that. I liked that book because I found its high level of analysis and comprehensive thinking satisfying and enjoyable.
I have read three of those books (not the one by Harris), and I agree with many of their points, particularly with Dawkin's case against a religious education. However, I would extend this to indoctrinating children into any kind of group identity at the expense of being open to new ideas. In my viewpoint, any group identity, be it religious, political, racial, whatever, can ideologize and strengthen to become something like a religion, and start to regard itself as the ultimate arbiter of truth, and it is these ideologized identity groups which have been responsible for the most atrocities, rather than religions specifically. And they all have one thing in common: certainty. As opposed to that, the findings of science are always preliminary and leave open the possibility that you've been mistaken about pretty much anything. In a world where you cannot know ultimate truth - and I believe we are such beings that cannot know that - plausibility and approximations are the best we can do.
atheism, nihilism, religion and group identity could be related based on the The "Antichrist", Nietzsche wrote that, "Nihilism is... the will to nothingness, the denial of life, the turning away from life." Christianity was a manifestation of this will to nothingness, arguing that it had "deprived the world of its goal" and "made everything meaningless."
But most of the people that read his books, they often forget that Christianity is a "belief", but the manifestation of the "will to do nothingness" may manifest to most of us regardless to belief if we tend to adhere on the beliefs itself. so Atheism, nihilism, religion and group identity overlaps to the will to do nothing and that is what makes them related through shared tendencies. Nietzsche believe that the will to do nothingness made us to overlook on the life's inherent value or meaning but it doesn't mean that life itself is inherently meaningless because we can't see it or too distracted to look on it, that would be the reason why he believes that "God is dead". I think that he's pointing the phenomenon of what and how it could lead us to this atrocious acts that caused by nihilistic perspective regardless to beliefs
Currently I am reading a book “ A short History of Atheism” by Gavin , I can relate to it. He also gave such arguments.
6:37 typo. Should read:
"GOD is not great"
It would be nice if you bookmarked the slides in your video.
Man, and here I thought we were gonna talk about Revelations ... 0w0
This would be a Bible for atheism and the dawn of scientific dogma
All four of the horsemen of new atheism were Aries, as well as Matt Delahunt, Cosmic Skeptic, Madilyn O'Hare and JFG, all of whom are famous for being outspoken atheists.
Just a coincidence? It's a remarkable one if so.
Atheist here, who transformed to anti-theist. Thankful for Freedom of Speech. If blasphemy laws were enacted, I’d be in jail, or worse. Peace.
Surely this would depend on the atheist concerned.... Myself... As a genuine Disc-iple I already know there are 5 horsemen of the apocalypse... Just ask Ronnie Soak...
odd, never even heard of Daniel C. Dennett, downloading books now
What website are you downloading them from?
@@lukecockburn1140 audible
So much brain energy is wasted in both a/theist & non,,,
Perhaps that energy can be place on how humanity, via tech & inguinuity can survive past our sun's red giant stage? In the end this debate or argument is similar to whether we believe in superman or not?
Atheist here but I always had multiple braincells to not go for New Atheism or Scientism.