Strange boatfellows
Anthony Grayling is not an enemy of new or gnu atheism, though I suspect some people would like to shoulder him into that category. He won’t be shouldered though. He’s very polite about it, but he won’t be shouldered.
The little jokes and kindly bearing can make Grayling sound quite benignly jovial about religion at times, as he chuckles away about “men in dresses” and “believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden”, and throws out playfully mocking asides such as, “You can see we no longer really believe in God, because of all the CCTV cameras keeping watch on us.” But when I suggest that he sounds less enraged than amused by religion, he says quickly: “Well, it does make me angry, because it causes a great deal of harm and unhappiness.”
He spotted the attempt at shouldering, you see, so he replied quickly.
…we have to try to persuade society as a whole to recognise that religious groups are self-constituted interest groups; they exist to promote their point of view. Now, in a liberal democracy they have every right to do so. But they have no greater right than anybody else, any political party or Women’s Institute or trade union. But for historical reasons they have massively overinflated influence – faith-based schools, religious broadcasting, bishops in the House of Lords, the presence of religion at every public event. We’ve got to push it back to its right size.
Not very anti-gnu, that. On the contrary.
it wasn’t the atheists, according to Grayling, who provoked the confrontation. “The reason why it’s become a big issue is that religions have turned the volume up, because they’re on the back foot. The hold of religion is weakening, definitely, and diminishing in numbers. The reason why there’s such a furore about it is that the cornered animal, the loser, starts making a big noise.”Even if this is true, however, the atheist movement has been accused of shooting itself in the foot by adopting a tone so militant as to alienate potential supporters, and fortify the religious lobby. I ask Grayling if he thinks there is any truth in the charge, and he listens patiently and politely to the question, but then dismisses it with a shake of the head.
“Well, firstly, I think the charges of militancy and fundamentalism of course come from our opponents, the theists. My rejoinder is to say when the boot was on their foot they burned us at the stake. All we’re doing is speaking very frankly and bluntly and they don’t like it,” he laughs. “So we speak frankly and bluntly, and the respect agenda is now gone, they can no longer float behind the diaphanous veil – ‘Ooh, I have faith so you mustn’t offend me’. So they don’t like the blunt talking. But we’re not burning them at the stake. They’ve got to remember that when it was the other way around it was a much more serious matter.
“And besides, really,” he adds with a withering little laugh, “how can you be a militant atheist? How can you be militant non-stamp collector? This is really what it comes down to. You just don’t collect stamps. So how can you be a fundamentalist non-stamp collector? It’s like sleeping furiously. It’s just wrong.”
Now the odd thing is that yesterday on Facebook (one does find out some interesting things via Facebook, there’s no denying it) the Institute for Science and Human Values flagged up a cruise next October with guest speaker…Anthony Grayling. The ISHV is very very very hostile to “militant” atheists. Several of its founding members spend a remarkable amount of time saying how hostile they are to “militant” atheists. I’m wondering if that’s going to turn out to be a rather tense cruise.
I vote for a pirate raid to rescue our mate and fit him out proper. Grayling would look splendid in a tricorn and eyepatch!
Ah, but it sounds as if AC Grayling, with his smiles and chuckles and little laughs, has got the tone right. When it comes to accomodationists, I suspect you can get away with throttling religion around the neck and stomping on the corpse — if you do it gently enough, and with a playful twinkle in your eye.
I know of gnu atheists who think that AC Grayling is not one of them. He really has the disguise perfected. But trust me, that man is more militant than most of us. And with a killer smile.
Have just come across this in Grayling’s ‘The Good Book’, which has just arrived:
‘Plousios asked, “What kind of man is the worst among men?” Penicros answered, “He who is good in his own esteem.'”
It seemed rather pertinent with respect to the recent contretemps.
Grayling is a gnu. And a good one, too.
We should make some kind of guide: “How to Identify a Gnu Atheist.” Regrettably, it might have to have a Jeff Foxworthy ring to it:
My money, as always, is on Grayling. By the time the cruise ends, I expect he’ll own the ship.
Oh that response has made my day. :-)
Right, I’m off to continue not collecting stamps…
The idea of an ideologically-organized cruise (or any vacation really) is a head scratcher to me.
I have never doubted AC Grayling’s commitment to gnu atheism. But he is very quiet and subfusc about it. But he has been giving religion short shrift long before Richard Dawkins et co. came onto the scene. All one has to do is read a number of his essays in that wonderful series of books, The Meaning of Things, The Form of Things, The Mystery of Things, etc. Wonderfully erudite, apparently understated, and absolutely death on religion.
I have just started reading his new book – an interesting experiment and I’m not yet sure what I make of it. What I could immediately predict was what line anti-atheist reviewers would take on it and sure enough:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23938503-the-king-james-bible-bashers.do
(Be warned this review is pretty much content-free abuse). I always like to get copies of such books early – it makes reading the reviews much more fun.
A gnu atheist is an outspoken anti-theist, an epistemological realist (pending good argument to the contrary), and usually an outraged (or at least deeply indignant) humanist.
Stumbled across Graying in the Half Price Books store several years ago and thought, where’s this guy been all my life and why isn’t he getting more play? Like Steve Pinker, he says things that are just as provocative in substance as the Four Horsemen et al, but in a way that tends not to raise alarms or, sadly, even general notice. Still, these are the flanking soldiers in the attack on toxic superstition, the quiet sappers adding intellectual support to our efforts at undermining bad old beliefs.
What we’re seeing here is the Overton Window in action, folks. In 2011, AC Grayling can say that religion is laughable, that it causes great pain and suffering, and that it is crucially important that its influence be reduced — and he comes off as the nice guy, the moderate. Big win.
On a similar note, I noticed that the Guardian’s coverage of the awarding of the Templeton Prize talks at great length about how controversial the prize is, and accusations that Templeton is trying to blur the line between reason and faith. Our objections are now a major part of the story.
Berlinerblau says gnus have had no political successes — um, what? In less than a decade, the mainstream media’s coverage of atheism and secularism has changed dramatically. Our concerns are now real political issues: fringe issues still in the eyes of many, perhaps, but highly visible nonetheless. That’s a pretty rapid pace!
I think we can all agree that it’s the hair.
excerpt fromWhy young men wore their hair long in the 60’s by Jeff Poniewaz
I think the Overton window is shifting but not in a completely predictable way. The frequent point that the gnus have made about the unquestioned respect for religious figures came to mind in the wake of the Catholic abuse stories in the past year or two when you started hearing people say the same things we have been saying for years. That was in Ireland, on the fringe of Europe and still relatively religious but very much included in the continent wide decline in religiosity. Its even spreading to the US.
Can anyone imagine a republican politician saying the following a decade ago?
From a CNN story about New Hampshire politician’s remark about a local bishops objection to his parties local policies.
Wo! I’ll have to friend-request D J Bettencourt immediately.
Bruce S Springsteen
Sorry – I am a felinist. I prefer cats.
i have just read “set prometheus free” and i found it wellwritten and very encouraging
Bruce Gorton
That’s either a typographical error, a flat non sequitur, or a witty reference I’m too dense to get. But for the record, I’m a felinist too, even a cat whisperer of some note. I speak kitty fluently.
Anyone who reads Towards the Light will not misunderstand Grayling’s attitude to religion,particularly institutionalized religion.
i am pretty sure that after this article ISHV shall cancel the invitation for Mr. A.C.Grayling
Jeezis, I hope not! But I don’t think that’s at all likely. He’s a Name, to say the least; the ISHV is a fledgling organization; Names are useful to fledgling organizations.