Abstract
Critics often complain that the ‘new atheists’ are arrogant, dogmatic, closed-minded and so on. Those terms denote ‘epistemic (or intellectual) vices’, or vices of the mind, so we can call those criticisms ‘vice charges’. Although they are very common, it is unclear whether they are merely rhetorical or whether they are substantive criticisms. The aim of this chapter is therefore to offer a framework for articulating and assessing these charges. I offer such a framework and consider two specific vices—arrogance and dogmatism—and ask, in each case, whether new atheists are vulnerable to a charge of vice. My conclusions are that: vice-charges are far more complex than critics appreciate; that critics can, at the least, say that certain new atheists may well be vulnerable to certain charges of epistemic vice; and that much more work needs to be done before one can charge new atheists with vices in a fair and robust way.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Battaly (2016) identifies a third position – ‘personalism’ – according to which a person can come to possess epistemic vices (and virtues) without their being responsible for doing so. If so, even if the New Atheists are epistemically vicious, they need not be responsible for being so – a consideration that those who deploy vice charges against them should carefully consider.
- 2.
On the topic of ‘faith’ see Bishop (2010).
- 3.
A classic defence of this claim is Feyerabend (1975).
- 4.
The concept of phronesis is central to Aristotle ’s ethics; a classic statement is Nicomachean Ethics, Book 5, 1,144b.
- 5.
A good example of social norms and the integrity of communities is Robert K. Merton ’s classic studies in the sociology of science—see, e.g., Merton (1938). It is interesting that his work was motivated by a sense of ‘active hostility to science’ from certain quarters of his society—the same perception that informs the New Atheists now.
- 6.
I develop this problem by distinguishing the definition and the exemplification of epistemic vice in Kidd (2016, §6).
- 7.
While this may seem like I am singling out Dawkins , the reader is invited to find counterpoints in the writings of other New Atheists. Indeed, this is how the claims are to be tested.
- 8.
- 9.
I am grateful to the editors for their comments and their invitation to contribute to this volume, and to an audience at the (New) Atheism, Scientism, and Open-mindedness workshop at Lancaster in 2012, at which it was first presented.
References
Aberdein, Andrew. 2014. In Defence of Virtue: The Legitimacy of Agent-Based Argument Appraisal. Informal Logic 34 (1): 77–93.
Baehr, Jason. 2011. The Inquiring Mind: Intellectual Virtues and Virtue Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———, ed. 2015. Intellectual Virtues and Education: Essays in Applied Virtue Epistemology. London: Routledge.
Battaly, Heather. 2010. Attacking Character: Ad hominem Argument and Virtue Epistemology. Informal Logic 30 (4): 361–390.
———. 2014. Varieties of Epistemic Vice. In The Ethics of Belief, ed. Jon Matheson and Rico Vitz, 51–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 2016. Epistemic Virtue and Vice: Reliabilism, Responsibilism, and Personalism. In Moral and Intellectual Virtues in Western and Chinese Philosophy: The Turn Toward Virtue, ed. Chienkup Mi, Michael Slote and Ernest Sosa, 99–120. New York: Routledge.
Beattie, Tina. 2007. The New Atheists: The Twilight of Reason and the War of Religion. Darton: Longman & Todd Ltd.
Bishop, John. 2010. Faith. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. Available from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/faith/. Accessed 8 Mar 2016.
Brown, Andrew. 2006. Dawkins the Dogmatist. Prospect Magazine 127: 69–70.
Bunting, Madeleine. 2011. Aggressive Atheists. Guardian Weekly Online. Available from http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/story/0,,2075857,00.html. Accessed 8 Mar 2016.
Cantor, Geoffrey, and Chris Kenny. 2001. Barbour’s Fourfold Way: Problems with His Taxonomy of Science-Religion Relationships. Zygon 36 (4): 765–781.
Cassam, Quassim. 2016. Vice Epistemology. The Monist 99 (3): 159–180.
Cimino, Richard, and Christopher Smith. 2010. The New Atheism and the Empowerment of American Freethinkers. In Religion and the New Atheism: A Critical Appraisal, ed. Amarnath Amarasingam, 139–156. Leiden: Brill.
Dawkins, Richard. 1976. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 2006. The God Delusion. London: Random House.
Dewey, John. 1998 [1917]. The Need for a Recovery of Philosophy. In The Essential Dewey, Volume 1: Pragmatism, Education, Democracy, ed. Larry A. Hickman and Thomas M. Alexander, 46–49. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Dickson, Rry. 2010. Religion as Phantasmagoria: Islam in The End of Faith. In Religion and the New Atheism: A Critical Appraisal, ed. Amarnath Amarasingam, 37–54. Leiden: Brill.
Dixon, Thomas. 2010. Introduction. In Science and Religion: New Historical Perspectives, ed. Thomas Dixon, Geoffrey Cantor, and Stephen Pumfrey, 1–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elsdon-Baker, Fern. 2009. The Selfish Genius: How Richard Dawkins Rewrote Darwin’s Legacy. London: Icon Books.
Feyerabend, Paul. 1975. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. London: New Left Books.
Gauker, Christopher. 1986. The Principle of Charity. Synthese 69: 1–25.
Harries, Richard. 2010. Foreword. In Religion and the New Atheism: A Critical Appraisal, ed. Amarnath Amarasingam, xi–xii. Leiden: Brill.
Harris, Sam. 2011. Letter to a Christian Nation. New York: Random House.
Haught, John F. 2008. God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens. Lousville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Jones, Ward E. and Tom Martin, eds. 2004. Immoral Beliefs. Philosophical Papers 33(3).
Kidd, Ian James. 2013. A Phenomenological Challenge to ‘Enlightened Secularism’. Religious Studies 9 (3): 377–398.
———. 2014. Emotion, Religious Practice, and Cosmological Secularism. Religious Studies 50 (2): 139–156.
———. 2015. Doing Science an Injustice: Midgley on Scientism. In Science and the Self: Animals, Evolution, and Ethics: Essays in Honour of Mary Midgley, ed. Ian James Kidd and Liz McKinnell, 151–167. London: Routledge.
———. 2016. Charging Others with Epistemic Vice. The Monist 99 (3): 181–197.
———. 2017. Is Scientism Epistemically Vicious? In Scientism: Prospects and Problems, ed. Jeroen de Ridder, Rik Peels, and René van Woudenberg, in press. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kotzee, Ben, ed. 2013. Education and the Growth of Knowledge: Perspectives from Social and Virtue Epistemology, special issue of the Journal for Philosophy of Education 47: 157–322.
Kurtz, Paul. 1997. The Courage to Become: The Virtues of Humanism. Westport: Praeger Press.
Lennox, John C. 2011. Gunning for God: Why the New Atheists Are Missing the Target. Oxford: Lion Books.
Lindberg, David C. 2010. The Fate of Science in Patristic and Medieval Christendom. In The Cambridge Companion to Science and Religion, ed. Peter Harrison, 21–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McGrath, Alister, and Joanna Collicutt McGrath. 2007. The Dawkins Delusion: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine. London: SPCK.
Merton, Robert K. 1938. Science and the Social Order. Philosophy of Science 5 (3): 321–337.
Nall, Jeff. 2010. Disparate Destinations, Parallel Paths: An Analysis of Contemporary Atheist and Christian Parenting Literature. In Religion and the New Atheism: A Critical Appraisal, ed. Amarnath Amarasingam, 179–202. Leiden: Brill.
Numbers, Ronald L., ed. 2009. Galileo Goes to Jail: And Other Myths About Science and Religion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pritchard, Duncan. 2010. What Is This Thing Called Knowledge? London: Routledge.
Reznik, David B. 1998. The Ethics of Science: An Introduction. London: Routledge.
Roberts, Robert C., and W. Jay Wood. 2007. Intellectual Virtues: An Essay in Regulative Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tiberius, Valerie, and John D. Walker. 1998. Arrogance. American Philosophical Quarterly 35 (4): 379–390.
Turner, Frank M. 2010. The Late Victorian Conflict of Science and Religion as an Event in Nineteenth-Century Intellectual and Cultural History. In Science and Religion: New Historical Perspectives, ed. Thomas Dixon, Geoffrey Cantor, and Stephen Pumfrey, 87–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, Douglas. 1998. Ad Hominem Arguments. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kidd, I.J. (2017). Epistemic Vices in Public Debate: The Case of ‘New Atheism’. In: Cotter, C., Quadrio, P., Tuckett, J. (eds) New Atheism: Critical Perspectives and Contemporary Debates. Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54964-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54964-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54962-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54964-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)