Atheism 2.0: Brief review of TED talk by Alain de Botton

I enjoyed the TED talk by Alain de Botton on the idea of Atheism 2.0. It is a subject that interests me, as I am a non-believer in theism who feels at times estranged from some of the mores and attitudes of some members of the atheist 'community'. I write that deliberately in 'scare quotes' as one of the features of atheism as opposed to certain denominations, churches or religious subgroups is that they do not have much of an authentic community in terms of warm, friendly interaction. Philosophical exchanges and scientific peer reviews are interesting, but not socially rewarding in the same way as meeting together to worship or some such thing. I have personally enjoyed informal philosophical meetings to discuss flighty ideas and serious concepts in a light-hearted setting over a drink or three, and there are many such groups, but they rarely venture much further than 'book club' territory. In fact, the internet has made a notable impact in bringing atheists together to share ideas, even if that is done in the space of a few barbed Youtube comments. However, they are notably united mostly by sharing a common enemy, and often fail to share much that positively enriches their daily experience of life.

In anticipation of reading more in his book, I have a few brief responses to the talk that I wished to write down.

One of de Botton's motivating premises in his talk: 'we have secularised badly', seems to me to be quite reasonable. Many of the hopes and dreams of sceptics, reformers and revolutionaries since the 1600s have gone sour.

His argument that moral lessons need repeating seems a strong one too. The idea that because I have done some moral philosophy at university, or once I have covered a certain amount of ethical training I don't need to do any more is obviously false, I think. From personal experience, for example, I find it helps me to return to the Art of Happiness at regular intervals.

There were plenty of good ideas in this talk about the social and personal benefits of religion. My main problem with the argument, as I understand it, is, I think, a practical one. How do you get atheists to agree on anything? Secular Philosophy works through a dialectic process of opposition. However, Alain de Botton seems to be suggesting a much more homogenised atheism. I'm not sure that atheists gather well together in herds.

Furthermore, the idea of institutionalising secular ideas is potentially off-putting. Much in a similar way to how those of a libertarian right-wing mindset might look at socialism and question their imposition of morals/values/communities/welfare, likewise, I think those of an atheist mindset might understandably ask: 'under whose authority would such structures be set up?' How will they be maintained?

The adoption or acceptance of the principles of the free market worked exceptionally well for those religious communities who settled in America (as John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge have persuasively argued in their recent book 'God is Back'). The competition between ideas, methods of worship and styles of charismatic preaching allowed religion to flourish whilst it became less and less socially acceptable in Western Europe. Is a free market of ideas and social organisations the way forward for atheism? Would atheists tolerate the rise of certain 'cult' leaders?

PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins seem to command a loyal following from a certain section of the internet community, but equally can be reviled by others who seek a different kind of atheism. For the record, I admire both, to a degree, but would not call myself a follower of their views, in any sense. I have found Dennett's ideas much more philosophically interesting, and Sam Harris' optimism much more encouraging. I have also really enjoyed listening to the late Christopher Hitchens. De Botton's talk seemed to suggest a need for someone to do some organising or mobilisation (or did I read him wrongly there??) How would this be brought about, I wonder? Is he thinking of something like the 2012 Global Atheist Convention? I reckon I am as keen on reason as the next atheist, but I am not sure I want to celebrate it at a convention with other atheists - with whom I fear I might share little, other than a non-belief in a personal theistic God.