This is an interesting article that I find largely congenial:

I do wonder what the authors mean by “humility,” which is an attitude they recommend for both believers and non-believers. Humility is a Christian virtue, and it has its positives and negatives. On the positive side, a dose of humility can be a fine corrective for some of the overweening arrogance on display, for instance, among the “self-made men” of Wall Street and corporate boardrooms. There is no such thing as a self-made man. On the other hand, when I hear people advocating humility, I find that they generally mean “humility for thee, but not for me.” In short, it seems to me that humility unalloyed with hypocrisy is a very rare commodity.

The Christian virtue that has more to recommend it is charity. I see no reason to be particularly humble in my atheism. I think I am right and my reasons for my beliefs have been tempered in the fires of philosophical debate. I see no reason why, in appropriate circumstances, I should not speak up positively and forcefully for my beliefs. Yet I think that charity is the right attitude to have towards those otherwise persuaded. Yes, there are irrational theists–and irrational atheists. Yet is it clear to me that many theists and atheists have discharged their epistemic duties and have fairly placed their beliefs under scrutiny and openly offered them up for criticism. I think that John Hick is right in An Interpretation of Religion when he argues that reality plausibly admits of either a religious or a naturalistic interpretation, and that advocates of one view need not condemn the other as unreasonable. On that irenic and charitable note, happy holidays to all contributors and correspondents to Secular Outpost!