People especially New Atheists think that belief is the opposite of knowledge but that isn’t really that case. According to Donald S. Lopez, “…belief is not without its historical effects [and] is not an index of the outer life.” In August 2013, Dr. Narendra Dabholkar humanist activist from India was assassinated for allegedly not believing in God and being against the concepts of superstition and black magic. He was also against the caste system (created from the concepts of karma and reincarnation) which he though was barbaric and unethical. He tried to encourage the government to pass an anti-superstition bill which helps “…bring social awakening and awareness in the society and to create a healthy and safe social environment with a view
…show more content…
As a non-believer, he hoped to get something for being rational in the future and that was paid with his life after fighting for 30 years. The bill passed a year after his death. According to Lopez, beliefs are not universal nor natural and it’s an idea that arises from a specific set of material interests . So, with the case of Dabholkar his interests were of religious charlatans and right-winged extremist groups he despised like the Sanatan Sanstha who were responsible for the 2008 bombings in theaters because the movies were portraying Hindu gods in a “bad light”. And his murder highlighted how Atheism and different sects Hinduism are “religions” not just belief vs. non-belief systems. Yet they all have “truth” claims regardless.
The centrality of non-belief in New Atheism connects to material concerns and their non-belief is only practical when they are against a world of those who “do believe”. Many invest their time writing books, appearing on shows/debates and conducting scientific studies to convince the religious a new way of living through radical non-belief to make a world a “better” secular place but their approach doesn’t represent the true nature of Atheism. There are a group of atheists who focus on social justice and rights for all (including the religious) --unlike Sam Harris who
As a non-believer, he hoped to get something for being rational in the future and that was paid with his life after fighting for 30 years. The bill passed a year after his death. According to Lopez, beliefs are not universal nor natural and it’s an idea that arises from a specific set of material interests . So, with the case of Dabholkar his interests were of religious charlatans and right-winged extremist groups he despised like the Sanatan Sanstha who were responsible for the 2008 bombings in theaters because the movies were portraying Hindu gods in a “bad light”. And his murder highlighted how Atheism and different sects Hinduism are “religions” not just belief vs. non-belief systems. Yet they all have “truth” claims regardless.
The centrality of non-belief in New Atheism connects to material concerns and their non-belief is only practical when they are against a world of those who “do believe”. Many invest their time writing books, appearing on shows/debates and conducting scientific studies to convince the religious a new way of living through radical non-belief to make a world a “better” secular place but their approach doesn’t represent the true nature of Atheism. There are a group of atheists who focus on social justice and rights for all (including the religious) --unlike Sam Harris who