A word about the details of the new atheistic state

A word about the details of the new atheistic state A word about case details New Atheism Talk of a new atheism has gained additional momentum recently. This momentum has gained strength from two main factors: First: The sensitivity of the subject in the Arab and Saudi society in particular. Second: The nature of the questions and the type of problems raised by this event, which were not limited to the religious or legal dimension only, but extended to the issues of education, rights, politics, society and culture. In these few lines, I will go beyond the detailed features of the new atheism, whose main features can be explored with the slightest extrapolation of atheistic outcomes in social networking sites, forums and other sites interested in cloning or reproducing Western atheism in our local environment. The important issue that I would like the reader to understand its dimensions and goals well in this context is that the new atheism is not a cognitive need imposed by the mind on the consciousness of modern man, as well as modern and pre-modern history, and is not a moral need pressing the great questions that have enthralled humanity since it recognized its helplessness and lack of centrality or power in the theater of cosmic sprawling our day, but it is primarily an "accidentalic" period. In this era the European continent went through terrible intellectual storms and seismic historical, political and cultural events, with which the identity of the European human has been enormously disturbed, and his ability to retain balance has deteriorated, and the overall picture of existence has become integrated, not incompatible, which led an influential philosopher such as Ken and Al-Bir to write his famous series of the nature of consciousness, its crisis, its origin, and the fate that ended it. Yes, there is no doubt that we need to understand the details of the new atheistic state, but more important than that is not to fall into the trap of a great philosophical fallacy about the movement of history, namely: to conceive of atheism in its new dress as a state of awakening man from a great delusion, or to imagine it as the natural end result of man’s long adventure in the search for truth. You, the reader, must consider this warning right meditation, and take it seriously, but to approach it to the century. It is this philosophical fallacy – often unconscious – in the interpretation of the movement of history that Francis Fukuyama, at the “end of history,” leaned on, intentionally or unintentionally, to uproot every cultural order that thought, merely thought, of standing in front of the “tsunami” of Western liberal capitalist democracy. Understanding the big picture is very important to give events their correct size, and to avoid loading many of the files are unbearable hints and connotations that are at best a source of anxiety and confusion of consciousness, and at worst the basis of a large deviation in perceptions and interpretations. We are in front of a civilizational wave that transcends reality and the data of history, either we confront it and initiate a cultural wave that restores balance to the Western awareness [2], or we remain in a position of defense, treatment and healing, as we have done and are doing now, until God comes by His command. The new atheism in terms of an arrogant tendency to awareness in a certain direction; it should not worry us; the Creator's historical laws can punish human ecstasy very harshly if humans exceed the limit that they are not allowed to transgress. As for the fate of God extracts them in the meanings of patience, jihad and jihad - like other global God's destiny - on the way to achieve his legitimate will; it is a divine gift to the believers The new atheism is not Richard Dawkins, nor Christopher Hitchens, nor Sam Harris, nor Daniel Dennett, nor Anthem Grylling, nor Paul Myers, nor Michael Rose, nor Stephen Bunker, etc., and the list goes on. New atheism is not a name, it is not a person. New atheism is in fact an emergency mental model of science and history, created by a set of conscious and unconscious hypotheses about life, the visible universe and existence as a whole. This is what we need to be aware of when any serious attempt to understand, prevent and attack new atheism. Atheism is critical, rebuttable, reversible, and would be meaningful to faith. [1] Leon Trotsky, Herbert Marcuse, Spengler, Jay Debord, Eric Fromm, Horkheimer, Adorno, Sigmund Freud, et al. [2] William Chetek describes the paradigm of perception in Western consciousness as fragmented and deconstructive while describing the paradigm of Islamic perception of existence as integrated, unitary, and inherently oriented. Abdullah bin Saeed Al - Shehri — Source: Brahin Center website - Published on 2019-12-09 (archived at the Internet Archive) http://braheen.com/mag/0th/39-new-atheism