|
Post by turoldus on Jun 21, 2009 13:15:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jamierobertson on Jun 21, 2009 20:38:59 GMT
Ahhh...
More thoughtful, tolerant comments on the role of evidence-based pistis from our favourite atheist.
NB - yes, skeptics, I know you're not all like that. Tim O'Neill, I'm looking in your direction. But just in case there are any who deny the existence of fundamentalist atheists...
Well, at least that's the message I took from that post.
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Jun 21, 2009 21:52:15 GMT
Ahhh... More thoughtful, tolerant comments on the role of evidence-based pistis from our favourite atheist. NB - yes, skeptics, I know you're not all like that. Tim O'Neill, I'm looking in your direction. But just in case there are any who deny the existence of fundamentalist atheists... Well, at least that's the message I took from that post. That is the infamous LucyQ. She is utterly crazy; seriously.
|
|
|
Post by noons on Jun 21, 2009 22:34:26 GMT
I think that was pretty much the BLEEEEAAAAAAGGHHHHHHsuperstition! that Humphrey was referring to, and we see it again as predicted.
However, this Lucy seems to be implying that the current political conflict in Iran is one between theism and atheism. I'm pretty sure most of the people demonstrating in the streets also pray formally several times a day, just like their opponents.
I've noticed this broader trend though in polemics about history. Some of the New Atheists seem to imply that anyone in history who disputed or rebelled against the prevailing religious beliefs or institutions at the time was basically an atheist, and therefore the New Atheists are part of the same role in history as Gallileo etc. Or some might say that if such people were in the present, they would be atheists now. I am highly skeptical of that entire idea, and I think it is mostly commenters who argue along those lines.
|
|
|
Post by merkavah12 on Jun 22, 2009 3:23:00 GMT
"More thoughtful, tolerant comments on the role of evidence-based pistis from our favourite atheist.
NB - yes, skeptics, I know you're not all like that. Tim O'Neill, I'm looking in your direction. But just in case there are any who deny the existence of fundamentalist atheists...
Well, at least that's the message I took from that post. "
My thoughts exactly. Our own Tim "The Manly Medievalist" O'Neil, Quentin Smith, Kevin Kessin etc. These fellows are what I think of when I hear "Atheism".
The point that should be taken away form all this is that, yes, Atheists are just like everyone else: they have their good seeds and they have their fanatics.
PS: Tim, if you actually did make your nickname "The Manly Medievalist", I can almost guarantee double the site hits. Think about it.... =)
|
|
|
Post by Al Moritz on Jun 22, 2009 8:52:38 GMT
The point that should be taken away form all this is that, yes, Atheists are just like everyone else: they have their good seeds and they have their fanatics. But why then do I get the impression that it is easy to find rational, nuanced, well-informed theists on the internet, while it is hard to find atheists these days who are not fanatical or at least irrationally dismissive of believers, mostly based on an utter lack of knowledge of philosophy and theology? Of all the atheists I have discussed with, I can count the ones that you can actually have a productive discussion with, and that do not have an extremely distorted view of religion, on the fingers of one hand (well, perhaps one and a half hands). Perhaps Tim O'Neill can comment on this. Al
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Jun 22, 2009 9:45:50 GMT
Hooray; James's article made the 'Reason' project's 'hall of shame' www.reasonproject.org/newsfeed/item/science_and_religion_a_history_of_conflict1/One chap even said: The author of this curious piece of nonsense appears ignorant of history. Ask Servetus, Galileo, or Bruno about how well science and religion have rubbed along. Some crimes it is a crime to forgive as Josepj Brodsky observed.Another says: One way of getting better knowledge about history in the light of science and religion is to read A.C Graylings book Towards the light. He gives a splendid narrative of the way science broke of from, and chatters, a thousand years of religious “orthodoxy”Oh dear. Actually there was quite a good review of 'Towards the Light' in the spectator by Edward Skidelsky www.spectator.co.uk/books/246311/part_2/a-march-that-has-lost-momentum.thtml
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Jun 22, 2009 9:52:41 GMT
But why then do I get the impression that it is easy to find rational, nuanced, well-informed theists on the internet, while it is hard to find atheists these days who are not fanatical or at least irrationally dismissive of believers, mostly based on an utter lack of knowledge of philosophy and theology?l I think there is a sampling bias based on the nature of the New Atheist movement which has a tendency to pick up the more combative personality types. It is after all, aimed at so called fundamentalist religion in America and sees the Christian mainstream as muddying the issue and providing a kind of pseudo-intellectual apologetic for the more extreme types of religion. The more thoughtful atheists, e.g Julian Baggini, Andrew Brown, John Gray are more keen to disassociate themselves from it. Also I think that any time you get a popular movement like this you attract all sorts of hangers on who are keen to get into arguments and point score on the internet. By the way, I came across Mr O' Neil policing the Agora forum at the 'internet movie database' under the persona 'Da Vinci Code is Garbage'. Can't wait for it to come out on general release. www.imdb.com/title/tt1186830/board/threads/
|
|
|
Post by jamierobertson on Jun 22, 2009 11:15:46 GMT
Oyy. I just posted a comment on the "Reason" (cough) project website. Who knows, maybe there will be some reasonable folk looking who want to find out more.
|
|
|
Post by unkleE on Jun 22, 2009 12:52:11 GMT
Oyy. I just posted a comment on the "Reason" (cough) project website. Who knows, maybe there will be some reasonable folk looking who want to find out more. (Quoting Luke Skywalker) "I have a bad feeling about this!" : (
|
|
|
Post by noons on Jun 22, 2009 14:37:56 GMT
I couldn't find your comment
|
|
|
Post by turoldus on Jun 22, 2009 14:54:13 GMT
Another says: One way of getting better knowledge about history in the light of science and religion is to read A.C Graylings book Towards the light. He gives a splendid narrative of the way science broke of from, and chatters, a thousand years of religious “orthodoxy” Using a book by a philosopher to lecture someone with a Ph.D in history of science is, well, surreal.
|
|
|
Post by jamierobertson on Jun 22, 2009 15:11:15 GMT
I couldn't find your comment Hmm. I tried to post it a couple of times, and it hasn't worked. I'll try again later on a different computer.
|
|
|
Post by Al Moritz on Jun 23, 2009 1:14:37 GMT
I think there is a sampling bias based on the nature of the New Atheist movement which has a tendency to pick up the more combative personality types. It is after all, aimed at so called fundamentalist religion in America and sees the Christian mainstream as muddying the issue and providing a kind of pseudo-intellectual apologetic for the more extreme types of religion. The more thoughtful atheists, e.g Julian Baggini, Andrew Brown, John Gray are more keen to disassociate themselves from it. Also I think that any time you get a popular movement like this you attract all sorts of hangers on who are keen to get into arguments and point score on the internet. Humphrey, I am not so sure. I have also argued with atheists on a classical music board, and these probably are not pre-selected for Dawkins-ness. But same thing there. The level of intellectual discourse is almost invariably disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by noons on Jun 30, 2009 3:12:27 GMT
I FIND THAT ON THE INTERNET, IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHAT YOU THINK, MOST PEOPLE ARE JUST OUT THERE TO START A SHOUTING MATCH AND INSULT PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM. THOSE WHO ACTUALLY WANT A SERIOUS CONVERSATION ARE HARD TO FIND ON THE INTERNET.
OH, AND I'M TYPING IN ALL CAPS ALL THIS WEEK TO HONOR THE MEMORY OF BILLY MAYS. RIP.
|
|