About Austin Cline

"I spent a lot of time reading, and some time posting, in a number of Usenet newsgroups well before I started writing about atheism. No one can spend much time in newsgroups dealing with controversial and political topics without developing a thick skin. It helps to remember that people who just engage in insults are usually covering up for a lack of substantive arguments. The best 'revenge,' then, is to make that as clear as possible by giving them enough rope to hang themselves."

Poke around the site, and you'll find a personal statement from Austin that reads, in part, "Both atheism and agnosticism are neglected in popular culture. When was the last time you saw an openly atheist politician, an article on atheism in a major periodical, or anyone discussing secular humanism as a serious alternative to religion?"

I asked if his view had changed, with more recent coverage of atheism in popular media:

"Even though writers like Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris are popular and represent a level of popularity not known by atheists a few years ago, the fact remains that little is seen of atheists, humanists, or alternatives to religion in the traditional press."

"How many newspapers carry opinion columns written by atheists or humanists, conveying an explicitly atheist or humanist perspective? How many 'religion' sections of newspapers carry information about atheism, humanism, or freethought? How often do we see explicitly atheist characters in fiction? How often do we see reporters asking pointed and skeptical questions of the religious beliefs of either religious leaders or politicians who are pandering to religion?"

"If we change the quote above to be about gays or Jews, we'd immediately see that it is (mostly) inappropriate because we see gay and Jewish perspectives all the time in popular media. One could argue that gays still have a long way to go, but it would be hard to argue that they are as invisible as atheists."

A good number of Austin's articles involve combating common misconceptions about atheism. When I asked if anything he encounters still surprises him, these common, simple errors were foremost in his answer: "I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at how often people make basic errors which they never would have had they done even a tiny amount of research, but for some reason it does surprise me. People 'care' enough to write to me, but not enough to do any independent research about...well, much of anything at all. I can't fathom that sort of mentality, but I encounter it with depressing regularity."

It seems that Austin repeatedly addresses the same misconceptions--not due to a repetitive nature, but because he continually encounters them in articles and comments he comes across while gathering material for his own posts. Since common misconceptions are a prominent issue with Austin, I asked some questions about his views on them, starting with which misconceptions he sees most often from other atheists.

"The two biggest misconceptions and points of debate about atheism which I see among atheists are probably the same ones I see with theists: that atheism is a positive, clearly defined ideology/philosophy and/or that atheism is defined narrowly as the denial of the existence of God rather than broadly as the absence of belief in gods. (Curiously, people sometimes try to argue both even though they are incompatible.) For theists these extend outward into a spider web of closely associated misconceptions (like that atheism is a religion, atheists can't be moral, etc.)."

"The arguments used by atheists for these errors are about the same as those used by theists--which is not a surprise because I think that they are both working from common cultural misconceptions, in particular an evangelical culture in which all sorts of misconceptions about science, philosophy, religion, and culture are operative. Offering the dictionary definition of atheism is popular, of course, but always involves either a highly abridged pocket dictionary or a willful disregard of anything in the definition that doesn't fit with one's preconceptions."

"I don't think we would be seeing nearly so many mistakes from atheists or theists if there weren't so many errors--some probably willful and deliberate--in apologetic works from evangelical Christians. Lies about history, science, and everything else are integrated in numerous books that are part of a huge publishing industry. It's only to be expected that they would, over time, negatively affect more and more people."

One section of the site is specifically titled "Atheism Myths & Misconceptions: How Theists Misrepresent Atheism." I asked Austin what he considered the most common theist misconception and, additionally, the most damaging:

"The most common misconception of atheism is one that lies behind just about every other misconception you are likely to come across: the very definition of atheism itself. People who mistakenly assume that atheism is either the explicit denial of gods or also a particular ideology as well are likely to believe a host of other errors on top of that. The next two most common misconceptions are probably the belief that there can be no moral values or behavior without theistic religion and furthermore that there can be no meaning or purpose in one's life without theistic religion."

"The most damaging misconception is probably the belief that atheism is incompatible with morality. Not only does it encourage more anti-atheist sentiments than the others, but I think it makes it even less likely for people to seriously consider it. Who would give up theistic religion if it meant giving up the only possible basis for morality?"

And if Austin could eliminate just one of these misconceptions?

"...I think I'd eliminate the assorted misconceptions about the definition of atheism. They may not be the most dangerous, but nearly all the rest stem from this problem and thus would be easier to dispel."

In addition to being a formidable and tireless advocate for atheism, Austin is also a regional director for the Council for Secular Humanism. Since humanism and atheism are often closely tied, I asked about his thoughts on the common pairing of atheism and humanism:

"There are advantages and disadvantages, but I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The major drawback may be that people who are inclined towards atheism could be put off if they assume that atheism requires humanism and they don't properly understand what humanism is. Fortunately, humanism isn't a dogma and is instead a set of values or principles that people tend to share anyway. More importantly, there's nothing about humanism that requires a person to accept every single principle or value outlined in any particular document or manifesto. Those who assume they have to sign off on such documents, agreeing with every single point 100%, are the ones most likely to be put off."

"As to the advantages, the most important may be that atheism itself offers no particular values, principles, or ideas on its own. Atheism is the absence of one single belief and is thus compatible with a wide variety of ideologies. An atheist can, in principle, just as easily adhere to noxious racist and fascist ideologies as to humane and liberal ones. Atheists who support freethought and humanist principles need to do so because simply being an atheist or announcing their atheism won't cut it."

Austin Cline is not the average atheist. He cares enough about his beliefs, and the beliefs and rights of all atheists, to take the time to explain them and defend them, publicly, to anyone who will listen. Stop by his site. You might not agree with everything he expresses, but whether you agree with him or not, he's clearly right on at least one point, he's definitely--as noted earlier--"succeeding in giving people something interesting to think about."

Browse all articles.