That question is the focus of a conversation as old as the internet and there isn't an end to it in sight. The general positions people espouse on this issue aren't varied to any tremendous degree, with the two outer edges arguing for a greater ability to commit atrocity for belief versus the lack thereof, with a few clustered around the middle pointing out certain nuances others might be missing.
Yesterday a godless columnist in Australia added his own voice to the debate. It's appreciated that the author doesn't shy away from the fact that the Communist regimes of Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin were atheistic, as some do. More worthy of appreciation however is the authors attempt to restructure the debate, moving it away from blame to one of inquiry.
While we may go back and forth on the issue of responsibility, raising our hackles and continuously battling over whose group is most "responsible", Mr Gross reframes things more clearly.
-
...if we try to analyse why an idea leads adherent to murder, the analysis must depend on several issues such as CAUSATION (did the atheism give rise to the atrocity) MOTIVATION AND PROXIMITY (did the atheism have such proximity that it could be said to have motivated the atrocity) and IDEOLOGY (did the tenets of the atheism encourage the atrocity).
This metric (which I'm going to abbreviate to CMPI) encourages examining actions not on a single rule, but taking into account the full spectrum of variabilities in order to reach a more clearer understanding.
Because atheism is not an ideology (its only "tenet" being not believing something), it certainly fails on that point. Proximity is a given, owing to the enforced state atheism of the Communist regimes, yet only in a (relatively) few cases could it be said to be the causation; organizations such as the Society of the Godless were responsible for fomenting much of the hatred and anger used against churches and later in the murder and imprisonment of bishops and clerics. Yet even this atheist organization propagandized as an outlet of the State, pushing the Stalinist party line (which was atheistic) as its philosophy. If we delete the references to atheism in Mr Gross's framework and insert different variables, we'll see new answers emerge which may better fit the known outcome.
-
...if we try to analyse why an idea leads adherent to murder, the analysis must depend on several issues such as CAUSATION (did the Communism give rise to the atrocity) MOTIVATION AND PROXIMITY (did the Communism have such proximity that it could be said to have motivated the atrocity) and IDEOLOGY (did the tenets of Communism encourage the atrocity).
Here the answer is less nuanced and far clearer. Yes, yes, and yes - which isn't much of a surprise, considering this response has been the rebuttal to the Atheism = Atrocity argument for quite some time.
For more information and further discussion, head over to my new website OaklandSkeptic.com
Comments