Laudate_Dominum Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) Make fun of people and they will agree with you and think you're amesome! Clever. With spokesmen like that it's no wonder atheism is so respected in our society. [url="http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2012/03/27/atheist-intolerance-and-the-new-salience-of-religiosity/"]http://thesocietypag...of-religiosity/[/url] P.S. Not saying that prejudice against atheists is justified by any means, just saying that Dawkins is comically undiplomatic and the old ridicule strategy may not be wise. Edited March 28, 2012 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1332896738' post='2409438'] Make fun of people and they will agree with you and think you're amesome! Clever. With spokesmen like that it's no wonder atheism is so respected in our society. [url="http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2012/03/27/atheist-intolerance-and-the-new-salience-of-religiosity/"]http://thesocietypag...of-religiosity/[/url] P.S. Not saying that prejudice against atheists is justified by any means, just saying that Dawkins is comically undiplomatic and the old ridicule strategy may not be wise. [/quote] That was an interesting read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the171 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 THIS IS amesome!! We are getting PERSECUTED!! No sarcasm! I'm seriously pumped. "BRING OUT THE RACK!!" Ourfaith is being shaken and now is when we cling on to what we know to be truth. Do not stand afraid, embrace the challenge as if it was a cross. This is our cross. Onward soldiers!! Into the battlefield! Onward Church militant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the171 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 My lack of sleep is seriously catching up with me. That post seemed a bit... Je ne sais quoi.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1332874801' post='2409267'] He wasn't saying that Catholics should be singled out among religious people for mockery. He was just using Catholicism as an example. He was saying that all religious belief should be mocked in public. And Dawkins has publicly insulted Islam. A quick Google search shows that he called it 'one of the great evils of the world'. I'm not saying that Dawkins isn't a prick. He is. I'm just saying that it is self-serving to take his comments and pretend that it is uniquely acceptable to mock Catholics in public and that Dawkins advocated this. He didn't. He advocated mocking all religious publicly and just used Catholicism as an example (seemingly) because so many people self-identity as Catholics but don't really believe a lot of the more extraordinary claims of the faith. [/quote] I'm sure you're probably right about Dawkins, here. I just meant that in general, it's much more socially acceptable to mock Catholics (and other Christians, for that matter) than other religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Just asking, 'cuz that's what I like to do... Don't Catholics (privately, without press conferences) "sorta" mock bible literalists and sola scripturists by pointing out the failures in logic? Don't Catholics fundamentally believe their faith, factual science, and reason are all mutually compatible? Wouldn it be more productive to engage secularists and Dawkins with dialogue in the reason and logic field and discuss and debate the principles that aren't just 'faith' dependent. It's easy pickings for Dawkins when Catholics get hung up debating logic with only issues requireing only a leap of faith. For example, how about discussing creationism and evolution with logic and illustrate clearly how they aren't incompatible with scientific fact. If you just want to debate Dawkins on transubstantiation, you may as well debate faith in the Flying Spagehtti Monster. How about discussing and debating Catholic philosophy with logic and reason and point out similar values. Just because someone's an atheist, doesn't make them a moral nihilst. Catholics and a moral objectivist, a Buhdist, and Muslims do have a lot of values in common. For the general betterment of society, cooperation sounds like a good idea. Or Catholics could dream and work for a Theocratical Dictatorship like the Taliban... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 There are plenty of Catholics around who could do exactly what you suggest - Dominicans, Jesuits, Fransciscans, etc. But for there to be a debate, Dawkins et al would have to listen rather than mock. Dawkins didn't recommend listening or discussing or debating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 The problem with Dawkin's speech is that he was speaking at something called a "Reason Rally." I don't mind being mocked by a first rate artist, but I don't suspect you'll find many of those at a Reason Rally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 [url="http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981221965"]http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981221965[/url] Here's a link to Dawkins' full speech. He's clearly a very intellingent and articulate man, but... his logic has some major holes in it. He points out that 40% of the population (of the US, if I remember correctly) thinks the Earth is about 10,000 years old. He seems to think that religion has caused this misperception. I would argue that bad education rather than faith/religion has caused this misperception, and also the fact that although the age of the Earth is very important to a scientist, it's not really on most people's radar. He does refer to Christians (in general) often, and to Catholics (specifically) about transubstantiation. Lot's of people make that kind of mistake, especially when talking to large crowds - they prefer to use an extreme example rather than a typical example; I call it an extreme example because most Christians don't accept transubstantion any more than most rationalists do. And he overlooks (rather conveniently, IMO) the extensive and long-standing Catholic commitment to education, including education in the sciences. I learned "evolution based on natural selection" in high school biology, and every Catholic school I know teaches it. So that's another hole in his logic - conflating Catholic beliefs with the beliefs of other Christian denominations and painting us all negatively with the same broad brush. Perhaps he should have paid as much attention in his rhetoric classes as he did in his science classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1332958652' post='2409721'] [url="http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981221965"]http://news.gather.c...281474981221965[/url] Here's a link to Dawkins' full speech. He's clearly a very intellingent and articulate man, but...[/quote] What makes him intelligent and articulate? I'm not being sarcastic, I don't know anything about him...just curious how you define intelligent and articulate vis a vis a man like Dawkins. F. Scott Fitzgerald has a good measuring stick: "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." Edited March 28, 2012 by Era Might Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 By "intelligent" I mean he knows a lot of facts - he's studied a good deal and retains a lot of what he studied - he can learn. By "articulate" I mean that he expresses his ideas clearly - when he's finished speaking, I know what he means, which allows me to agree or disagree with him because he said it understandably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 He gave too simple a description of Transubstantiation. Is Dawkins one of those atheists that supports leftism and doesn't have the balls to say we should just kill the weak? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I think [i]The Ancestor's Tale[/i] is my favorite of his books. It's not the most bestest and most awesomest science writing I've ever seen or anything. I tend to see the guy as three things: a moderately successful academic (from what I know of his academic career and h-index); a very successful science educator (judging by his popular science books, shows, and position); a top spokesman for secularism, atheism, and anti-religion (based on his popular books on the subject, speaking tours, BBC shows, his think tank, and the fact that he's so often talked about). As an academic I have no problem with the guy. As a public science educator I don't have much problem with the guy - quibbles maybe, but no big deal. As a spokesman for atheism etcetera, [i]oy vey![/i] Although, having had a wee bit of experience interacting with intellectually dishonest antiscience fideists I can sometimes relate to where he's coming from. Maybe if we were more forthright in denouncing bogus forms of religion in our midst there wouldn't be such a niche for "new atheists" and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1332961204' post='2409742'] Is Dawkins one of those atheists that supports leftism and doesn't have the balls to say we should just kill the weak? [/quote] I don't know what you mean by that exactly but you might enjoy his interview with Peter Singer. Here is Dawkins' opening statement. "Peter [Singer], I think you must be one of the most moral people in the world..." Although it is mostly about Singer, you can get a sense of how Dawkins thinks on moral issues. [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYYNY2oKVWU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYYNY2oKVWU[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) Something about Dawkins just grates my nerves. Edited March 28, 2012 by Hasan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now