Good atheists to read?

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Flag *
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf, pdf Max filesize is 16 MB. Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1440343863981.jpg (13.18 KB, 385x307, 385:307, TRULY CLASSY CLOTHING ITEM.jpg)

Good atheists to read? Anonymous 08/23/15 (Sun) 15:31:03 1147d5 No.1929

So...I'm an atheist (in general terms) but most of the time I only follow "new atheists" like Dawkins and Harris and the likes of them, but I have come to realise these guys aren't exactly the "champions of rationality" I and everyone else eating up this new fad have come to know them as, and their reliance on science to explain absolutely everything, even in places where philosophy is the name of the game, is rather misguided. Scientism, I believe it is called.

I'm very new to philosophy in all aspects and am quite young (15), so could you guys recommend some entry-level atheist books that aren't shit like the god delusion? And also some newer atheistic philosophers that aren't part of the new Dawkins-tier atheism wave? And, sorry if I'm asking too much, but what is in your opinion the best book against atheism to challenge my beliefs?

Thanks

Anonymous 08/23/15 (Sun) 16:09:32 1147d5 No.1930

Jean-Paul Sartre

Ludwig Feuerbach

Anonymous 08/23/15 (Sun) 16:26:02 1147d5 No.1931

Bruno Bauer

Anonymous 08/23/15 (Sun) 16:32:34 1147d5 No.1932

Also if you want to understand modern atheist thought you should study Hegel.

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 01:04:47 1147d5 No.1940

Thank you. Would Bertrand Russell also be a good starter?

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 01:24:19 1147d5 No.1941

File: 1440379459871.jpg (147.59 KB, 780x520, 3:2, 1437280500702.jpg)

>>1929

Hello fellow newfag (turning 17 on the 28th), I know some atheist philosophers but I haven't read most of them so I can only give names and summaries.

Nietzsche's (who I am reading, and enjoying) an atheist with a very interesting idea of spirituality.

Also, Russell is pretty easy to read, but from the quotes I've seen from him on religion, you're probably gonna get the same stuff you get from "new atheists." Nevertheless you should check him out if you want. I've only read his book on Bolshevism.

>>1932

>entry level

>Hegel

Slow down there. :P

Schopenhauer is an atheist as well but also a heavy read.

>>1930

If you're gonna name Sartre, might as well include Camus. I ordered The Outsider but I'm still waiting for it.>>1940

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 02:46:29 1147d5 No.1944

>>1929

What arguments specifically do you find unsatisfactory by those new atheist authors. What philosophical questions are you trying to answer?

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 03:33:21 1147d5 No.1945

>>1944

Is there a god? Is religion correct? etc, anything to do with religion and god is what really interests me.

I find that one of the problems is their actual approach to atheism, their insistence on using science for absolutely everything, even such subjects as ethics and morals, and science is not philosophy (though it has and should remain a close relationship with philosophy, for example philosophy may be able to see the faults in religions logic, science can provide an alternate explanation for how the world and everything came to be, and how it works.) and god is not a scientific hypothesis so should not be treated as such. They also tend to not argue with actually good theologians (though i'm not sure any theologian is right), instead forming arguments against a "straw man" cliche, stupid form of religion.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a hate for the new atheists, I just don't like their approach to atheism. I still like watching/reading them discuss science and they did provide a good push for many people (including me) into rational thought, I just think that now it would be best to branch out into better atheistic philosophers.

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 03:35:31 1147d5 No.1946

>>1940

Forgot to mention Quine. Also haven't read it, but his "Two dogmas of empiricism" is commonly presented to counter the scientism you mentioned.

http://www.ditext.com/quine/quine.html

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 03:47:05 1147d5 No.1947

>>1941

>>1946

Thanks man, I think i'll first read an intro philosophy book like Think by Simon Blackburn, then move on to Bertrand Russell because he is an easy read (i'm not the best reader) and at a closer inspection he seems quite good too, also will read that Two dogmas of empiricism you linked. I started reading the stranger by Camus quite a while back but didn't finish as i'm lazy and ebooks are always a pain for me to read, but I think I will order some of his books in paper form and try again. After that, who knows, I have lots to pick from.

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 04:10:55 1147d5 No.1950

>>1948

Np. I find ebooks hard to read too. You said you're 15, so if you're in school you could try the library's philosophy section like me.

Here's another good one by Ludovici:

http://www.anthonymludovici.com/ri_pre.htm

Although I read it quite a while back, I remember liking it. Easy read.

Breath of fresh air to see a irreligious traditionalist conservative.

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 04:12:26 1147d5 No.1951

>>1950

*an irreligious

Anonymous 08/24/15 (Mon) 04:43:02 1147d5 No.1952

>>1950