Really Listening to Atheists: Taking Nonbelief Seriously

[rug]

When Larry Alex Taunton talked to young atheists about why they left Christianity, he interpreted their objections as matters of style, not substance. That's not accurate or fair.

Jeffrey Tayler
July 24 2013, 11:51 AM ET

As an atheist, I have frequently had religious acquaintances and even family members misunderstand the basis for my lack of faith. So when Larry Alex Taunton, a Christian who has debated nonbelief with celebrity New Atheists Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, recently wrote about his conversations with college-aged apostates, emerging with several conclusions about why these young people are leaving the church, I was interested.

Taunton and his organization wanted to understand how young men and women become avowed nonbelievers, and they contacted a number of campus secular groups to ask if their members would share their stories. Their respondents were mostly ex-Christians who had left the church during high school. Though Taunton acknowledges that most young atheists he has met in his career start out by "attribute(ing) the decision to the purely rational and objective," he highlights several other themes drawn from further discussion with the respondents: they found their church's "mission and message ... vague"; "they felt their church offered superficial answers to life's difficult questions"; they respected ministers of genuine belief; their "decision to embrace belief was often an emotional one"; and the Internet was a factor in their journey to nonbelief. Taunton concludes by suggesting churches not shy away from being serious about belief and the Bible. In sum, according to Taunton, it would seem that the atheists to whom he spoke mostly suffered from personal disappointments with the church, rather than from disagreement with Christian dogma or religion as a whole.
Taunton's analysis amounts not to an objective assessment of their words, but pseudo-diagnosis presented in a way that skirts what they were really trying to tell him.

Taunton's are deeply problematic findings. Because what this kind of analysis does, whether intentionally or not, is peremptorily dismiss these atheists' valid objections and present snippets from the interviews in such a way as to insult the sincerity of their nonbelief and foreclose other possible explanations for their apostasy; namely, that Christianity may be losing its grip over increasing numbers of young Americans not because its preachers and pastors are doing a shoddy job of delivering their message or listening to their flock, but because the young Americans find the religion itself to be inherently implausible or morally objectionable.

Taunton introduces the reader to a number of members of the Secular Student Alliance and the Freethought Society. He interviews them, hoping to hear about their "journey to unbelief" and create "a composite sketch of American college-aged atheists" -- something that I am not sure it is possible to do in any accurate and nuanced way. (And as an atheist, I would argue that, if anything, it is the journey to belief that needs to be studied.)

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/07/-i-really-i-listening-to-atheists-taking-nonbelief-seriously/278069/

Taunton's article:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/listening-to-young-atheists-lessons-for-a-stronger-christianity/276584/

[Dawson Leery]

1. Mr. Taunton is quite disrespectful.

"Doctrines that promise eternal rewards for some of us, eternal damnation for others, and mandate the observance of a moral code to which all humanity is supposedly subject, demand the closest scrutiny. Taunton's interviewees have done that: scrutinize. Their decisions to leave the church, based on that scrutiny, deserve respect."

Religious apologetics of both the RCC and Evangelical background have been making every attempt to spin in order to minimize those who have rejected organized religion, especially Christianity.

Perhaps this is why (from the comments section):
"A lot of Christians still seem to delude themselves into thinking that belief in God is "natural", which would mean that converting atheists back is only a matter of packaging Christianity the right way. Secretly I do think a lot of them realize that the belief of most people rests on fragile foundations, which is why conservative Christians are so adamant about wanting government institutions to constantly reaffirm their Christian beliefs."

[rug]

3. Respect is good.

[cbayer]

2. Good analysis and I think some of his criticism of Taunton is valid.

Taunton definitely went after this topic with an agenda. Never a great idea when one is sincerely trying to get something valid.

The Taunton article was posted here in early June:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121883281

[bunnies]

4. "... I would argue that, if anything, it is the journey to belief that needs to be studied"

Exactly. Belief in the unbelievable really confuses me. But then again, Im convinced there is no such thing as a bible literalist and therefore I wonder how anyone can call themselves a true believer.

[dimbear]

5. Confidentially, the problem is the zeitgeist. Christianity is so 20th century. n/t

[LostOne4Ever]

6. In regards to the earlier article by Taunton

Its pretty easy to see his bias when he says things like:

Atheists particularly fascinate me. Perhaps it's because I consider their philosophy -- if the absence of belief may be called a philosophy -- historically naive and potentially dangerous

.

Or resorts to stereotypes like

abused children often do love their parents -- and she was angry with God for his death

But the fact that he dismisses with such a cavelier attitude:

To hear them tell it, the choice was made from a philosophically neutral position that was void of emotion

Should be the biggest warning sign that he is trying to promote an agenda.

[cbayer]

7. I agree. He had an agenda and it was obvious.

He is condescending towards atheists and very unlikely to get what he says he is looking for - an objective assessment of young atheists.