Becky Garrison normally makes her living taking shots at the sacred cows of religion. As senior contributing editor for The Wittenburg Door, she’s used to exploring the incredible peculiarity and stupidity of the fundamentalists and puts irrationality of the Highest Order in her crosshairs of satirical justice.
But now she’s moving her spotlight from the religious nuts to the “New Atheists.”
With her new book, The New Atheist Crusaders and Their Unholy Grail, Garrison unleashes a comical, moving, and clever salvo of wit at the pop-atheist horde. Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins are lined up in her sights and the “cool, refreshing cup of reason” couldn’t have come at a better time.
Garrison makes no bones about her perspective, making sure the reader knows that she’s no scientist and she’s no theologian. She’s a religious satirist and a regular person. Her approach to the material is bright and persuasive, as her laudable “normal person” take on the material is friendly and sadly all-too-rare in the world of polemics.
Far too often, the Argument from Authority is utilized to gain ground. Here, Becky Garrison takes that argument down, brick by brick, with her sense of humour and her conversational style.
The New Atheist Crusaders is packed with footnotes and quotes from the likes of Harris, Dawkins, and Dennett. Garrison offsets the atheist commentators with a charitable measure of Christian and religious authors, including Brian McLaren, Ron Sider, and Jim Wallis. She also references many Christians and believers in the scientific community, including Francis Collins.
The real beauty of the book isn’t in the war of quotations, though. It’s in the wit and style of Garrison. She cheerfully makes her way through the material, alternating swiftly through shots of humour and cold blasts of sarcastic delight. Unrelenting in her desire to expose the “New Atheists” for what they are, Garrison pulls out all the stops in one astute chapter after another.
Article comments
1 - David Windhorst
Debating things such as the role of religion in society and the evidence for a deity are "outlandish"?
2 - Jordan Richardson
No, the caricatures, tone, and foundation of the modern debate are often outlandish and, luckily, ripe for satire.
The debate itself has been occurring since the beginning of time and is of central significance to our lives, at least for the most part. There are those who obviously feel no reason to debate or even discuss the idea of spirituality, God, gods, religion, atheism, and so on.
I often envy those people.
3 - duane
Jordan, you say the author is Unrelenting in her desire to expose the “New Atheists” for what they are.....
What are they? And what exactly is a "New Atheist"? Thanks.
4 - Jordan Richardson
The "New Atheist" is essentially a sort of "pop term" that was created to refer to the latest and seemingly sudden crop of atheist authors and atheist literature that seemed to arrive around the same time to capture in on current events. Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins are the three Garrison focuses on here, but Christopher Hitchens is often considered one of them too. She was unable to procure any material from Hitch's book, sadly (his publishers would not allow her to excerpt god is not Great), but he does remain one of the more popular of the "group."
I'm always a little wary using that term, namely because the brand of atheism is certainly not new. I think the term is used to describe the approach of these individuals more than the philosophy, as they appear to be almost evangelical (with some exceptions) in their approach and make the case that the atheists have been the "silent majority" for far too long, especially in the United States.
That's not to say that there aren't fair messages within the group, as I've enjoyed the books Garrison discusses immensely as well.
For more on the "New Atheists" and some of the paragons of the "movement," check this out and possibly this one.
Hope that helps.
5 - Jennifer Bogart
Hmm, curious to know your definition of a 'fundamentalist' as well :). I might fall into that classification in your opinion. Oh no! There may be one in your midsts ;).
6 - Jordan Richardson
Jennifer, I can assure you that there are MANY fundamentalists in my midst (try an entire family!) and I'm more than pleased to spend time with them, eat with them, drink with them, and discuss theology with them.
I think the point of Garrison's book and of this entire discourse is to laugh at ourselves for all of the interesting things we believe and all of the ways we believe them.
Specifically, I think "fundamentalist" is really a relative term, just like "left-wing" and "right-wing" are relative terms. It all depends on where you stand. In terms of this particular book, fundamentalists are generally defined as Biblical inerrantists, conservatives, etc. It may be inaccurate and stereotypical, but that's generally how the public discourse runs in these circles.
I think labeling, sadly, tends to be easier than getting to know people individually.