Syftet med föreliggande religionsvetenskapliga studie är att synliggöra hur betydande aspekter av livsåskådningskaraktär återspeglas i den populära tv-serien True Detective 1 – och med särskilt fokus på ateism undersöka och kartlägga en av tv-seriens karismatiska huvudkaraktärers perspektiv och positioneringar. I centrum står Rustin ”Rust” Cohle och dennes hållning, handlingar och tal. Undersökningen utgår från tre frågeställningar: Vilka olika livssynspositioneringar och tematiker av existentiell livsåskådningskaraktär är utmärkande för karaktären Rust? Hur kan dessa närmare beskrivas och förstås på ett övergripande plan? Och i vilken utsträckning har Rust lösgjort sig från en äldre form av ateism, till förmån för en senmodern och mindre polariserande variant? Runt karaktärskomplexet Rust – som en prototyp för en sorts förtrollande ateism – exponeras följande fyra kategorier: 1) Scientisten: En position präglad av en scientistisk och naturvetenskaplig, ateistisk hållning. 2) Zenbuddisten: En position präglad av asketism, kontemplation och en fascination av jaget som en illusion. 3) Terapeuten: En position karaktäriserad av den terapeutiska diskursen, vars psykologiserande förklaringar går ut på att legitimera individens lycka eller lidande – och därigenom tar över den äldre religiösa berättelsens funktion.4) Messiasgestalten: En position med markant messianska förtecken av både hög- och lågkristologisk natur och som i någon mening här inkorporerar övriga kategorier. Serien avspeglar således genom den messiasliknande karaktären Rust både starka ateistiska och scientistiska strömningar i vår tid, präglade av både naturvetenskap men också ett – till vissa delar – österländskt synsätt bortom den judisk-kristna traditionens epistem, hand i hand med ett semi-sekulärt och terapeutiskt trevande efter reflexivitet, mening och en större sakral och kanske rentav metafysisk öppning. Det är möjligen något av ett paradigmskifte – för att tala med Thomas Kuhn – som karaktären Rust föregriper och förkroppsligar. En både-och-människa som både vill ha det sakrala och profana som en möjlighet – inte som ett akademiskt motsatspar! / Enchanting atheism?: A study of atheism pictured in popular culture. True Detective as an example. The purpose of this study of religious science is to visualize how significant aspects of a characteristic philosophy and views of life are reflected in the popular TV series True Detective 1 – and with particular focus on atheism, explore and map the perspective and positioning of one of the charismatic main characters of the TV series. In the center stands Rustin “Rust” Cohle and his attitude, actions and speech. The study is based on three questions: What different views of life and themes of existential views are characteristic of the character Rust? How can these be more fully described and understood on an overall level? And to what extent has Rust broken himself away from an older form of atheism in favor of a late modern andless polarizing kind? Around the complex of character that is Rust - as a prototype for a kind of enchanting atheism - the following four categories are exposed: 1) The Scientist: A position characterized by a scientific and atheistic stance. 2) The Zen Buddhist: A position characterized by asceticism, contemplation and a fascination of the self as an illusion.3) The Therapist: A position characterized by the therapeutic discourse whose therapeutic narrative is based on legitimizing the happiness or suffering of the individual - thus adopting the function of the old religious narrative. 4) The Messiah character: A position with striking Messianic overtones of Christology of both high and low nature and which in some sense incorporates the other categories. Through the Messiah-like character Rust the series thus reflects both strong atheistic and scientific currents of our time, characterized by not only science but also – to some extent – by an Eastern view of life that goes beyond the episteme of the Jewish-Christian tradition, hand in hand with a semi-secular and therapeutic grasping for reflexivity, meaning and a greater sacred and perhaps even metaphysical opening. It is possibly somewhat of a paradigm shift – to some extent plead Thomas Kuhn – that the character Rust anticipates and embodies. A both-kind-person who wants to have the sacred as well as the profane as an opportunity - not as an academicopposing pair!

This study examines the state of research concerning the ideology of New atheism and interactions and implications in relation to religious studies in Swedish upper secondary school. The text primarily aims to examine which the core values of New atheism are, and to what extent these core values are expressed in religious studies in Swedish upper secondary schools. The study also attempts to position new atheism in a wider socio-political context, in order to establish why it might be problematic in relation to the anti-discriminatory aspects of the Swedish school curriculum. The study concludes that there are few works specifically investigating new atheism in the context of Swedish schools. In response to this, the study has primarily focused on two themes: defining core values of New atheism and discourses on religiosity in Swedish upper secondary religious studies classrooms. The results on the former are primarily based on literature by Dr. Stephen LeDrew, and the latter from observational studies by Dr. Karin Kittelman Flensner. These results are compared, resulting in a short analysis of the prevalence of New atheism in the Swedish religious studies classroom. The results show correlations between classroom discourses and new atheist values but present no evidence of causality. Further research that examines the transmission of values through social media are suggested.

Upplysningen var en period av radikala förändringar. Religion, vetenskap och politik influerades under denna period av de vetenskapliga framgångar som gjordes under 1600-talets vetenskapliga revolution tack vare bland annat Galileo och Kopernikus. Trots att upplysningens påverkan inte begränsades till enbart vetenskap och filosofi utan även religion finns det en etablerad definition av upplysningen som icke-religiös. Christopher Hitchens och John Gray är båda ateister men har markanta meningsskiljaktigheter när det kommer till upplysningen och deras tankar om periodens främsta representanter. Hitchens tillskriver upplysningen ideal som förnuft, framgång och en ärlig intellektuell strävan medan Gray menar att upplysningen var en era av blind hängivelse till förnuft och vetenskap som ersatte den monoteistiska guden. Han menar även att upplysningens tendens att intellektualisera och legitimera rasism genom att inkorporera den i vetenskap har lett till moderna rasistiska ideologier. Även om dessa perspektiv skiljer sig i hur de beskriver upplysningen och deras främsta tänkare är Grays analys mer historisk och även fri från en form av ytlig romantisering som Hitchens gör sig skyldig till. En granskning av utdrag ur verk från Voltaire, Baruch Spinoza och David Hume gör det svårt att känna samma vördnad för dem som Hitchens gör och legitimerar Grays beskrivning av eran som fylld av rasism, kolonialism och intellektuellt förtryck av allt som inte var europeiskt.

The purpose of this essay is to analyze the ideology of the cultural phenomenon, that is as political as it is controversial, the new atheism. By studying the ideas and values of four prominent new atheists, commonly referred to as the ‘four horsemen of the new atheism’, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett, this study aims to, in some ways challenge, and in others, nuance, the categorization of the movement. Its adherents have often been labeled as, for example: ‘secular fundamentalists’, ‘evangelical’ and ‘radical secularists’. None of these designations are inherently wrong. But I think there is a more fitting term available: ‘societal secular maximalist’. This term is a modified version of ‘religious maximalism’, coined by the historian of religion at the University of Chicago, Bruce Lincoln. I argue that the new atheist ideology is not fundamentalistic because it admits fallibility if another theory where to disprove it within its own scientific discourse. Considering this fact, it does not hold is central ideological feature, most commonly a Darwinist theory of evolution, as absolute. Due to this, and some other factors, I argue that the societal secular maximalist categorization is more fitting because the scientific and humanistic views of the ‘four horsemen’ lay claim to all aspects of human existence, private and public, emotional, and factual along with the morals, ethics and aesthetics of our societies.

This essay intends to examine the atheists Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Michel Onfray's arguments against religion, based on the themes of religion, atheism and the perception.of their present worldview. In addition, the research aims to find out whether it is suitable to talk about a new atheism. And, if so, whether such newatheism correspond with the definition represented by the Christian critics. The essay intends to contribute to a very limited research on the so-called new atheism without applying pro-religious arguments. Previous research and theory highlight the problem of defining the terms atheism, religion and secularism a concern that is reflected by the five critics troughout their arguments. What really united the critics were the idea about religion taking too much place in society, and the opinion that atheistic morality is at least as good as religious morality. In addition, the authors agree that religion is not needed to maintain good morale, on the contrary, religion affect the morale negatively. They also assumed that religion restricts people and and that moderate religion more or less leads to, or is responsible for, fundamentalism. Also, the value of truth and contempt against relativism brought the authors together, although they were sometimes justified by very different arguments. Crucially, however, are the differences in their definitions of religion, both concerning their focus on substantive and functional definitions, the relationship between absolute, relative-, and private religion and their political focus. To regard these authors' arguments as a new atheism is thus hard to justify. The results conclude that both the Christian critics and the five critics of religion generalize their opponents view of atheism or religion, and also fail to define themselves in order to be able to unite as a group against the other.

The modern swedish atheism is led by Christer Sturmark, chairman of Humanisterna, the swedish humanists. In this essay I study the epistemology of Christer Sturmark to find out on what basis he makes his assumptions about knowledge, faith, belief and his view that scientism is the only way to reach real knowledge. I present a closer historical look at the research about and philosophy of epistemology in general and then I analyze Christer Sturmarks book "Tro och Vetande 3.0 - Upplysning i det 21:a århundradet" and compare the views presented in that book to historical and contemporary philopsohers and religous scholars to extract the epistemology of Christer Sturmark, as it is presented in his book. To gain a more thorough understanding of his epistemolgy, I then compare his view to the swedish churchs´view of God as omnipotent. Finally I present a conclusion about the nature of Christer Sturmarks epistemology, if it is logically consistent and how it relates to the way humans can organize their understanding of the world.