Think Thank Thunk

The glory of God is man fully alive.                 St. Irenaeus

Name:
Location: Aztec, New Mexico, United States

Friday, September 19, 2008

D'Souza and Atheism Part 1

What’s So Great About Christianity by Dinesh D’Souza Part 1

       I have been reading D'Souza's book over the past several months. Like CS Lewis' books, it is heavy reading because he says so much in so few words and covers such a wide range of arguments. I have been curious for the past several decades about what will happen as the center of Christianity moves out of the West. A partial answer for me is that several of my favorite Christian apologists originate from the Indian subcontinent. D'Souza came from India young enough to become involved in American politics at a national level.
       I had intended to summarize his book with a page or two, but am finding that impossible because of the subject range so here goes with D'Souza Part 1

Note that when quotes are included without referencing the author, I am quoting D'Souza

Chapters 1 & 2

       D’Souza opens his book with an aggressive statement about atheism. He say the world is witnessing a huge explosion of religious conversion and growth and Christianity is growing faster than any other religion. We are witnessing the twilight of atheism. The ranks of atheism are shrinking as a percentage of the population world wide. The fact that it is not so obvious to us living in the USA is that Christianity is growing in the southern hemisphere and Asia, but not as much in the west, especially in the USA and Europe. An indicator of the fact that secularism is not progressing as fast in the USA as many atheists would like is the regularly repeated puzzlement of secularists about the data that shows the number of people who believe in God and have doubts about evolution has stayed fairly constant for decades. An interesting and growing trend in Europe is preachers from developing nations moving to Europe to serve as pastors for churches there.
       Secularism, the idea that you can isolate the physical world and especially science and call it reality has lost some of its appeal. D’Souza says; “Secularism has lost its identification with progress and modernity, and consequently it has lost the main source of its appeal. God is very much alive, and His future prospects look to be excellent. This is the biggest comeback story of the twenty-first century.”
       A somewhat bizarre argument for the reason for the demise of atheism is that it is anti-evolutionary – there is no survival value in atheism. Secularism says that life and existence is meaningless and purposeless. Given that foundation, it is not surprising that secularists tend to not reproduce themselves. Atheists such as Scott Altran and others believe that religion requires a commitment to ‘factually impossible worlds’. The question for atheists then can be posed; Why humans would evolve in such a way that they come to believe in things that don’t exist. Christianity teaches that you are a special creation of a good and all-powerful God; created in his image with the capacities to think, feel, and worship that set you above all other life forms.
       Imagine these as two tribes of people, the secular and the religious, subscribing to two world views. The secular is made up of people who are not sure why they exist at all and are made only of matter with no explanation of why they can think at all. The religious tribe is composed of individuals who view their every thought and action as consequential. Which of the two tribes is more likely to survive, prosper, and multiply?
      “Atheism, not religion, requires a Darwinian explanation. Atheism is a bit like homosexuality: one is not sure where it fits into a doctrine of natural selection.”

4 Comments:

Blogger Samuel Skinner said...

First off, I find the point about the spread of religious zeal sort of funny. Reminds me over the spread of communism. You remember that? It was nowhere, and then it got one country, than another, and another... soon it had about half the world. And then the house of cards came down.

"Secularism, the idea that you can isolate the physical world and especially science and call it reality has lost some of its appeal."

Secularism is the when the government is religiously neutral. It has nothing to do with claims on reality.

" there is no survival value in atheism."

There is a survival value in murder. In rape. In torture. In racism. And yet we don't do those- I wonder why?

"Secularism says that life and existence is meaningless and purposeless. "

No, secularism is a government policy. You are strawmanning atheism. And it says no such thing. It merely implies that there is no meaning or purpose handed down from the Gods.

"Given that foundation, it is not surprising that secularists tend to not reproduce themselves."

Yes, because we want this planet swarming with people, right? Do you honestly think more and more people is a good idea?

"Why humans would evolve in such a way that they come to believe in things that don’t exist."

It has been answered. Basically it boils down to the same principle behind optical illusions- short cuts are taken to save time, but occasionally... they screw up.

"Christianity teaches that you are a special creation of a good and all-powerful God; created in his image with the capacities to think, feel, and worship that set you above all other life forms."

But only men- women get the shaft. Or is this the "new and improved" version?

"The secular is made up of people who are not sure why they exist at all and are made only of matter with no explanation of why they can think at all. The religious tribe is composed of individuals who view their every thought and action as consequential. Which of the two tribes is more likely to survive, prosper, and multiply?"

The secular. Look at human history- the US, England, France, the rest of Europe, etc dominated the globe- all secular societies. The question you are asking is wheter it could be done by atheists.

Denmark says yes. The USSR says yes. What? You don't think going from a peasent based nation to a world power is impressive?

" “Atheism, not religion, requires a Darwinian explanation. Atheism is a bit like homosexuality: one is not sure where it fits into a doctrine of natural selection.”"

Simple- atheism is a result of the desire for truth that is part of our minds- a part of the process that is part of us because the truth keeps us alive.

Homosexuality has a host of competing theories- they are rather interesting. One is that it is due to a range of traits and gays are merely on one end, others have to do with nurturing, etc.

11:49 PM  
Blogger Soul Level said...

I like some of Skinner's comments above. I'd like to know what you think about this, too, Doyle, not just D'souza. Here's a couple things I think so far:

D'Souza asks "Why humans would evolve in such a way that they come to believe in things that don’t exist." There are many reasons, books have been written just about this question, but off the top of my head, here are two: One, we love stories and make them up, and embellish them at every opportunity. Two, religion is a great way to organize people and society.

I'm curious whether D'Souza is saying there is only Christianity and Atheism/Secularism. Because that is surely not reflective of what is going on in the world.

I also would take issue that a secularist or atheist sees her life as lacking purpose. I would challenge the author to read any of the Taoist literature, especially the Tao de Ching, which is devoid of a personal God, thus atheist, but full of life and purpose and "abundant life."

The comment about secularists not reproducing themselves is laughable. With nearly 6 billion people in the world, I think even Christians should limit their family size out of respect for what and who are already here. and I think most people do, even the Catholic Church is rethinking the doctrines concerning birth control.

Thanks for posting again. I never know whether you agree with what you're reporting on, though. ( I guess that should have had a "Former English Teacher Alert."

12:52 PM  
Blogger Samuel Skinner said...

Have you read "Guns, Germs and Steel"? That is actually Diamond's theory- centralized religions were formed to justify the authority of kings, encourage troops and give people an incentive not to kill strangers.

Dinesh views are best reflected in "The Enemy at Home". In short, he believes that "religion" is threatened by the dirty atheistic leftists and that Islam and Christianity have to join together to destroy them. I'm not kidding. It essentially crosses the line into open treason, but to his credit, he wants the alliance so that he can destroy the terrorists AND the leftists he blames for inciting them.
http://www.dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html

Atheism and secularism are two differant things, which the author doesn't seem to be able to understand. For example, Confucious was concievably an atheist, but wasn't a secularist, while Jefferson was the opposite.

As it is, atheism lacks purpose given to an individual. The sort of purpose behind "the chosen one" in mythology.

Of course, it has no bearing on wheter an individual can enjoy their life.

Technically we could jam alot more people on the planet. The problem is the lifestyle... and the flexibility. We can't have every person on the planet with American standards of living- but that is what everyone is aiming for. The ecosystem and resource bases would be stretched beyond their limits. As it is, we probably are fine- minor crisis do not affect the whole.

Still, adding more people makes problems more severe- for example, the population fo Bangladesh is stuck on a horrible spot, but there is no plan to move them. The average height above sea level is three feet. Don't worry- their neighbors have a plan... put the Indian army in their path. Yeah, if they flood permanently, they are screwed.

As it is atheists can have more kids (see the second world)- most of the current examples are from (comparitively) rich atheists. Rich people tend not to have as many kids.

11:56 PM  
Blogger complexspecificity said...

No, I haven’t read “Guns, Germs, and Steel”, but the summaries indicate he’s proposing theories about why some cultures or geographical areas are more successful and he has quite a few critics.

The ‘Whys’ make interesting speculation and it might have been better (though not as much fun) to keep to the central point of the introductory chapters. The point being that there is an upsurge of religiosity or spiritualism in the world (a fair amount of which is not to the benefit of people) in a time where, in the West at least, most everything is portrayed as having natural and definitely not supernatural causes.

As for D’Souza, it’s obvious he’s a conservative and your summary appears to be a caricature of his summary. If you’ve read “The Enemy At Home”, you know more than I do. What I see looks interesting, thanks; I’ll put the book on my reading list.

5:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home