How Reasonable was the Reason Rally?
by Alan Anderson
While I was not present at the 2012 Reason Rally, I heard many interesting stories about the rally, particularly about the main event. The headliner of the event was Mr. New Atheist himself, Dr. Richard Dawkins (author of The God Delusion). While there were many activities during the rally, many people remember the rally based on the speech (video above) delivered by Dawkins. As far as I can tell, Dawkins’ speech was the most memorable during the rally and embodied the soul of what the event was truly about. It makes sense. He’s the icon of modern atheism. Dawkins assures atheists that they can confidently be the ‘brights’ among a see of intellectual depravity.
My concern about the Reason Rally is simple; is it compatible with reason? Many in the unbelieving community wave the flag of reason and allege to pray at altar of science but is it reasonable to believe that atheism is sitting on a firm foundation that can withstand the weight of such claims. As Frank Turek brilliantly describes in his new book Stealing from God: Why Atheists Need God to Make their Case, that atheists cannot make their case for atheism without stealing qualities about reality that wouldn’t have existed without God. Essentially, they need God to fight against Him. With this premise in mind, how can atheists promote a rally that alleges to celebrate the reasonability of atheism when reason wouldn’t have existed in a universe without the existence of a God?
It’s clear that the atheists fail to understand the philosophical implications of their worldview. They’ve developed their own Ten Commandments for the 21st Century without acknowledging that the very commandments that they’ve development are without ontological foundation (review article here). Atheists belligerently complain about the mean ol’ Old Testament God without realizing that all moral actions of any kind are completely subjective and physically determined (review article here). Is the same thing going on with the Reason Rally? Are they claiming that they’re advocates of reason when they’ve misinterpreted the implications of their own worldview in an attempt to smuggle in reason? Given their philosophical track record, it seems that the only thing they’re consistent at is being inconsistent.
Is Reason Compatible with Atheism?
Since Dawkins was the main event, it is curious to see how Dawkins defined reason, “Reason means basing your life on evidence and on logic, which is how you deduce the consequences of evidence.” I wholeheartedly agree with his definition. However, does this definition align with all of the implications that atheism brings to the table? There are a couple of really good questions that one must ask if this question is going to be answered properly…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>