In the Philippine jungles after World War II, a few lonely Japanese soldiers carried on fighting for decades, not realizing the war was over. The last of them surrendered his sword in 1974 (photo at the top).
In a different context, but not so far off from that poignant chapter in military history, some New Atheists still fight on for their cause. But honestly, I’d be hard put to name them. Maybe Neil deGrasse Tyson? Even Lawrence Krauss has softened. It’s not that atheism per se has necessarily waned, but the aggressiveness and self-confidence have greatly faded.
The New Atheist phenomenon started with Richard Dawkins’s 2006 The God Delusion. And now, writing in The Telegraph, Stephen Meyer remarks on a momentous anniversary: we’re almost exactly two decades out from the publication of that book.
A Lot Has Changed Since Then
But the science has all been trending against the famed atheist biologist, as it had already been doing in the 20th century. Writes Meyer, author most recently of Return of the God Hypothesis:
Twenty years ago, Richard Dawkins published his international best-seller The God Delusion, thus establishing “New Atheism” as a major cultural force. Over the ensuing decade, other authors — such as Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Lawrence Krauss and Daniel Dennett — seized the popular imagination with their respective arguments about why belief in the divine is untenable.
The physicists among them argued that the universe could be explained “from nothing”. The biologists argued that Darwinian explanations of “apparent design” in living organisms make appeals to an actual designing intelligence unnecessary. Thus, Dawkins concluded: “God almost certainly does not exist.”
But now, two decades on, the influence of the New Atheists has waned. Former adherents, most notably Ayaan Hirsi Ali, have repudiated atheism entirely and embraced the Christian faith. Others, such as Alex O’Connor, the hugely popular atheist YouTuber, and Steven Bartlett, the businessman turned podcaster, have moderated their outlooks too. Ironically, even Dawkins admitted in 2024 he feels “at home” in the Christian “ethos” — though he still firmly rejects the existence of God.
As many atheist philosophers (such as the eminent John Gray) have noted, the New Atheists’ philosophical arguments were never very good. Moreover, their arguments seemed strangely anachronistic following many of the great scientific discoveries of the 20th century.
Dark Matter and a Supposed First Principle
Meyer cites lines of evidence from cosmology, physics, and molecular biology. But, the surviving New Atheists object, science must “reject the idea of a designing mind because no such entity can be directly observed.” Is that some sort of scientific first principle? Not at all, as is also becoming clearer:
Dark matter …, which has been in the news of late, was first inferred not because it could be seen, but because — if it existed — it would explain the otherwise unexplainable motions of galaxies within distant galaxy clusters. The fact is that scientists often infer unobservable causes from their observable effects, and the inference to intelligent design from the observable features of living cells has this same character.
The piece by Meyer has sparked quite the online dialogue, with 1,780+ comments so far. More on that coming up. Read the rest at, “Science is proving Richard Dawkins and the New Atheists wrong.” You may need to sign up for a free subscription.