They loudly, sometimes angrily, and frequently call themselves the "new atheists," and their voices have become a persistent buzz in the public media. They insist that they do not believe in God, which they habitually spell with a small "g", or any other divine beings. Yet, from time to time, one hears from them a whisper of something else—in, for example, a PBS interview with one of the gurus of new atheism, Richard Dawkins (here). In that interview he was asked, "Why do you think that in an age of science so many people, even in the West, and particularly in America, continue to believe in religion?" Dawkins responded:"I don't understand why so many people who are sophisticated in science go on believing in God. I wish I did. You'd have to ask them. I know that in some cases what they mean by God is very different from what the ordinary people that they talk to think they mean by God. There are physicists who are deeply awed, as I am, by the majesty of the universe, by the mystery of origins -- the origins of the laws of physics, the fundamental constants of physics, and who are moved by this to say there is something so mysterious that it is almost like God, and maybe use the metaphor of God. God is in the equations. God is in the fundamental constants. And that's fine. I mean, that's just redefinition of that which we find mysterious at the basis of the universe."Other new atheist authors occasionally avow feelings of awe and mystery in the face of nature and the universe. They tip toe up to the edge of admitting that there is a "something" out there that is the source of this mystery that lies "at the base of the universe." Were it not for the way "ordinary people" think about God, Dawkins might even be willing to say that he thinks that there is a something that we might use the word God to describe. But, in the face of what he considers to be the superstitious beliefs of "ordinary people," he refrains because he doesn't want to associate his views of this mysterious basis of the universe with their unacceptable beliefs. When, furthermore, we read the new atheist literature, what we find is that the "God" they reject is the narrowly constructed God of fundamentalism and biblical literalism. They heap scorn on this little God who is narrow-minded, violent, judgmental, and damns otherwise innocent unbelievers to eternal hell-fire. This "God" inspires injustice and prejudice as well as out and out violence in "his" believers who among other things reject the findings of science when they don't accord with their superstitions. That's fine. Lots of committed people of faith agree with their assessment of narrow-minded theisms.
So, when they aren't carefully distancing themselves from superstitious forms of theism, do at least some of the new atheists think it possible there is a God, a "something" that lies "at the basis of the universe"? Yes, some of them apparently do. Do they thus believe in God? It all depends on what one means by "believe" and "God." If God is a mystery at the base of the universe and belief means intellectual agreement to a proposition, then, apparently, "yes" again. Some of them do "believe" in "God". They are almost but not quite atheists. If by "believe," however, we mean trust in God, then "no" they are not theists but atheists. So, it looks as though they are kinda—kinda not atheists.
