Speaking of thought leaders…I was looking for something and happened on this article by Jerry Coyne in The New Republic last October. It’s a riposte to an article by John Gray, also in TNR, trashing Richard Dawkins. I can easily believe Gray’s is a crap article, because John Gray seems to specialize in crap articles. But I read the first paragraph of Coyne’s article, and found a claim that I think is absurd.
It’s not a good time to be Richard Dawkins, for he alone, like the scapegoat of Leviticus, must bear the brunt of everyone’s hatred of atheism. (Sam Harris sometimes serves as a backup goat.) Even though Dawkins has never proclaimed himself as any kind of atheist “leader”—his eminence among nonbelievers is purely a byproduct of his books and talks—he is the poster child for atheism, and everyone who hates atheists, including some other atheists, comes down on him.
The claim I think is absurd is that
Dawkins has never proclaimed himself as any kind of atheist “leader”
You must be joking!
I can easily believe it’s true that Dawkins has never said “I am an atheist leader” – but that’s not the only way of proclaiming oneself as a leader. Here’s the thing: RD set up a foundation for science and reason, with his own name in the title. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that is decidedly proclaiming oneself as a leader.
And he acts as a leader, too. He throws his weight around. He does what he can to exclude people he dislikes from conferences and rallies. He tells women how to feminist. He ranks degrees of bad in discussions with feminists about what they get to object to. He complains of witch hunts. He promotes his friends. He scolds the world on Twitter.
So, no. However unfair the John Gray article is, it’s not the case that Dawkins has never proclaimed himself as any kind of atheist “leader.”
I can believe John Gray wrote an idiotic article — I’ve jumped on Gray a few times myself.
The striking thing about Coyne’s article is that it isn’t about defending atheism or rationalism — it’s entirely about shielding Dawkins from criticism. It’s just kind of weird. But I guess that’s the kind of thing you need to do nowadays to get on the right side of the Thought Leaders.
He has been called a “Thought leader” surely, and not just by people who are criticising him. What about the World Atheist Council thing (I forget what they actually called themselves). I am pretty sure all of those on the council were called “thought leaders” when it was set-up.
This might seem off-topic, but I cannot recommend this epic deadspin article on Jason Whitlock, because parts of it made me think of Dawkins and co:
My favorite part is Whitlock providing an inspirational quote from himself that goes “A leader recognizes leadership and follows”. Good luck unpacking that one.
And there’s the fact that he never corrects the many people who do call him an atheist leader. I mean, if someone were to use the phrase to refer to me, I’d say, “Whoa, what? I’m not an atheist leader or thought leader of any kind! I don’t know why you’d think that, but seriously, not even close.”
I’ve jumped on John Gray many times, going back even before “new atheism” existed to be his target. He’s reliably annoying…a bit in the style of Brendan O’Neill. “Disrupters.”
@3 themann1086:
Middle managers,
While I agree with you about Dawkins being self-recognized as an atheist leader, I have to take exception to your justification:
I agree that represents thinking of oneself as a leader, but setting up a foundation for science and reason is no more an atheist activity than setting up a foundation for morality would need to be a religious activity. Plenty of leaders for science and reason have been religiou just as atheists have been leaders in much of the moral reasoning we use today.
Beth, I didn’t say setting up a foundation for science and reason is an atheist activity. You misunderstood.
@PZ Myers
Jerry Coyne might as well be Dawkins’ sockpuppet. I’ve never heard of nor seen any daylight between them on their positions, and Coyne always comes angrily to Dawkins’ defense whenever he’s criticized.
That t-shirt. You know, the one with the symbol that was meant to universally represent atheism, make the wearer instantly recognizable as an atheist.
With RIchard Dawkins’ name right underneath (which is why I never bought one)
The man clearly set out to make his name synonymous with out-atheism.
He made his name THE LOGO OF ATHEISM.
(I will admit though, that Dawkins clearly IS a thought leader. He thinks thoughts, expresses them, and gets tons of followers to adopt and repeat them. He absolutely is a thought leader. But those thoughts are pretty fucked-up)
I love not Terry Eagleton but he did write a good article on the miserable nihilist Gray:-
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/sep/07/highereducation.news2
Never let it be said that you’re inconsistently dim, Beth.