America Without God?

I don’t often rebut other articles, but on occasion I feel that I would be intellectually negligent not to do so. One such article that requires a response is entitled “America Without God” (see here). It was recently published in The Atlantic by contributing writer Shadi Hamid, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute. This article is so bloated with egregiously specious arguments that it is a real challenge to rebut it concisely.

The tl;dr that is being put forth by Mr. Hamid boils down to the following fallacious assertions…

  1. Religiosity, or religious-like conviction, is a universal and unavoidable human condition that must inevitably manifest itself in some fashion.
  2. This “religiosity” is nebulous, but seems to be defined by Hamid as an innate human compulsion to embrace an “ultimate loyalty” expressed through “strongly held ideological convictions.”
  3. As religion has declined, the resulting “God-shaped hole” has been filled by a similarly fervent set of political convictions.
  4. This “sublimation” of religion into politics has not resulted in a more rational world as promised and expected. Therefore, secularism is disproven as better set of beliefs.
  5. Religiosity cannot be “effectively channeled into political belief without the structures of actual religion to temper and postpone judgment.”
  6. Christianity is superior since it motivates people to be forgiving and to “withhold final judgements for another time – perhaps until eternity.
  7. Without a religious reawakening, we are left with either “world-weary resignation,” “violence,” or a “divisive wokeism.”
  8. Therefore, we should give up on secularism and re-embrace Christianity as our best hope for a better world. If we do not, dire consequences will result.

Sigh, where do I start?

First, like many articles in The Atlantic, this one is bloated and convoluted and loaded with gratuitous and irrelevant references and quotes. I don’t know if this is simply to fill space, or to argue by quantity, or to argue by creating the perception of authority, but one should not be misled into thinking that because it is hard to follow that it must be really smart.

By way of contrast I will quickly and clearly list some of the problems with this article…

  1. There is no evidence that “religiosity” is a necessary or unavoidable condition. It may be difficult to stop drinking whisky without dipping into the cooking sherry, but this does not disprove sobriety.
  2. The vast majority of Trump supporters are also the most gullibly religious believers in our population. They did not turn to Trump to fill any “God-shaped void.” They embrace Trumpism because their religious rationalizations have conditioned their brains to accept nonsense.
  3. The Left has not embraced “wokeism” to fill any void left by secularism just as atheists in general have not felt compelled to turn to anything beyond sound rational thinking.
  4. To assert that “secularism has failed” as a given is a ridiculous claim. First, we are still hugely religious as a nation. Second, secularism HAS succeeded dramatically in making our nation a saner and more inclusive place for all and has protected us from the worst extremes of religious zealotry.
  5. To claim that Christianity “tempers” our worst impulses is again asserted as a given without any serious credibility. There are countless burned, tortured, and lynched spirits that can attest to Christian forgiveness.
  6. And why is an eternal deferral of judgement and punishment a good thing? Justice must be timely to be fair and must be exacted in the real world.
  7. Lastly, but hardly the last flaw, is the fear-mongering that forms the final argument. Embrace Christianity or all the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah will be befall you!

The author is clearly motivated by a revulsion of Trumpism, a movement only rational-sounding to religious magical thinkers, then makes a false equivalence with wokeism, and concludes that the problem is secularism and that the cure is yet more religion. He attempts to maneuver us into an intellectual false choice between a secular dystopia and acceptance of organized religion as the only possible alternative. This is, quite simply, nonsense.

Look, I know I am being harsh. But this is a high-profile article that is receiving a lot of publicity. The author is out on the interview circuit spreading this nonsense of pro-religious manipulation and fear-mongering on talk-shows all across the country.

The truth is that we have not yet given secularism a chance to show us a saner world free from religion. The truth is that many of us are atheists and quite comfortable. We will not recant on our death bed nor will we ever pray in a foxhole, and we do not need to fill any God-shaped hole with Trumpism or Wokeism or any other *ism.

Now, that is not to say there is no problem. I have always emphasized that as an atheist I would not want to simply “do away with religion.” Religion has trained our brains to accept nonsense. We must fix that first or else we’ll simply adopt other nonsense, yes like Trumpism.

Reason can be our rock. Our best hope as a species is not merely the least destructive catechism of nonsense. We can learn to be rational. That is why my focus has always been on teaching fact-based thinking rather than attacking religion. My book (see here) was based on the premise that we must eliminate magical thinking, religious or non, by teaching rational thinking.

So I have still not given up on the vision of a rational, ethical, and healthy secular world and I assume John Lennon would not take back his words either…

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one

5 thoughts on “America Without God?

  1. Tim Mossholder's avatarTim Mossholder

    I just stumbled across your old blog post here, and was caught by your statement, “Religion has trained our brains to accept nonsense.” As a pastor who has dedicated his life to growing in the ways of Jesus, these kinds of statements are somewhat amusing and/or confusing to me. Just yesterday I reread the short book of James in the New Testament. Off the top of my head, here are some of the “nonsensical” themes put forth by the author: persevering under trial; not discriminating based on class; being quick to listen and slow to speak (and even slower to become angry); putting one’s faith into positive action by doing good; caring for widows and orphans; not slandering others; not oppressing the poor; mercy triumphing over judgment; and loving your neighbor in the same way you love yourself.

    Yes, those teachings are all being promoted on the basis of a faith in Jesus. Call them crazy, call them nonsensical, but if these kinds of ideas were to permeate our society and our world, it would be rather transformative in the best ways possible.

    Can you achieve those same ideals without faith? Possibly. But in my 60 years of life, I’d say anecdotally that it’s not as likely and it doesn’t seem to be as sustainable over a lifetime.

    These are the very kinds of nonsense my faith has taught me to believe. And as long as I have breath, these are the kinds of nonsense I’ll keep preaching.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Tyson's avatarTyson Post author

      Thanks for your comments, Tim. I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond to the article. Believe me when I tell you that I take no joy or satisfaction whatsoever in calling into question a lifetime of good works by faith-based leaders such as yourself. But I also have my own deeply heartfelt calling – to speak frankly in support of facts and reason.

      You are surely smart enough to know that your arguments are deeply flawed. First, you cherry-pick admirable – and very secular – teachings from amidst an overwhelming number of nonsensical claims, such as miracles, gods, and afterlife, etc and then you try to suggest that those are the things I am calling nonsensical. Clearly, I am not and I am confident you must know that.

      I stand by my assertion that religion conditions people to accept nonsense. If you are truly interested in considering this, I suggest you read my book, Pandemic of Delusion, which presents this in a much broader and deeper manner that might influence your thinking and your ministry.

      Like

      Reply
      1. Tim Mossholder's avatarTim Mossholder

        Hey – didn’t even know if you’d see my note on this old post, and I haven’t yet checked out your other resources. But I truly appreciate your engagement here. Yes, my argument is flawed. It’s incomplete for sure. And I believe your argument (if looked at with real objectivity) may be as well. Reason alone (in my view) is not fully adequate to address areas of transcendence, beauty, love, sacrifice, hope, etc. Does reason have thoughts on all these? Certainly. But does it truly help to bring greater depth, color and meaning to the experience of life? Not so much IMHO.

        But I’m grateful for your gracious reply. Toward a more generous future…

        Like

Leave a comment