I am usually a fan of Richard Dawkins' precient comments but I found this one rather disappointing:
"I believe future historians of the decline and fall of religion will come to see the 2012 GAC in Melbourne as a pivotal turning point." Rachard Dawkins (in the 'Reflections' on the Global Atheist Convention)
What does it mean to say the GAC was a "pivotal turning point"? As I observed in the previous post, after two years there's no sign of a lasting impact for GAC part 1. Neither do I (as a historian) expect to look back in two years time and remark on the profound impact this installment of the event had.
According the a clip from Australian television program, The Project (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFstCJ7A9O8&feature=youtu.be&noredirect=1) over 4,000 attended this time around. Now, over 4,000 Roman Catholic nuns marching to St. Peter's square, throwing off their habits and declaring the Church a farse would certainly be a significant moment in the decline of religion. But 4,000 (mostly) atheists paying to listen to a set of speakers and comedians? That certainly sounds like a notworthy point in the history of the comodification of knowledge but little else. As one Project presenter stated, "With conference goers paying up to $440, there's big money in bagging big religion".
I hope the event does have some positive influence but I rather doubt it will be "pivotal".
No comments:
Post a Comment