The God Delusion on More 4

MagicMarker

Jakkass wrote: »

Wouldn't you be as suspicious if storm2814 were just reading Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, Dennett et al?

Or is it only when people are reading Christian Apologetics?

Absolutely not, in fact I'd encourage anyone who's a little confused to read books from both sides, and this thread would confirm. (I'm not confused by the by, just curious)

I even have my own copies of the Bible and Qur'an, although I have the KJV of the bible, so it's a bit of a yawn fest.

I presume you don't appose my suggestion to Storm?

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

I've never read any of Hitchens'/Harris' books,never heard much about them either,but if they're on the same view as Dawkins then I don't really want to either tbh.

No it's alright,I have been/was an atheist for a very long time and talked to many atheists,my whole immediate family are atheist apart from me and I've heard a lot of their views on it already,anyway if you want ask more you should probably send me a PM or something because I don't want to annoy the mods by going off topic so much!:p

I was always an atheist too, that doesn't mean I knew anything about it. I learned a lot more from Dawkin's/Hitchens/Harris that just cemented my views.

I'm sorry to say but you're being very closed minded regarding Dawkins, it's unfortunate, especially when you just ignore other people's work because of it.

storm2811

MagicMarker wrote: »

I was always an atheist too, that doesn't mean I knew anything about it. I learned a lot more from Dawkin's/Hitchens/Harris that just cemented my views.

I'm sorry to say but you're being very closed minded regarding Dawkins, it's unfortunate, especially when you just ignore other people's work because of it.

I'm not being closed minded on him imo,I've seen a good few interviews with him and documentaries and I just do not like his views,even when I was a "proper" atheist I didn't agree with him.
It's just the way he talks about religion and to religious people.

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

I'm not being closed minded on him imo,I've seen a good few interviews with him and documentaries and I just do not like his views,even when I was a "proper" atheist I didn't agree with him.
It's just the way he talks about religion and to religious people.

Well a lot of his views are pretty much synonymous with atheism in general, what do you not agree with?

WesternNight

storm2811 wrote: »

I'm not being closed minded on him imo,I've seen a good few interviews with him and documentaries and I just do not like his views,even when I was a "proper" atheist I didn't agree with him.
It's just the way he talks about religion and to religious people.

It's funny that you say that...he's actually quite moderate and respectful in the way he speaks to religious people. I can't understand how he does it, to be frank. He's much more restrained that I'd be able to be with the people he discusses things with.

One of his points is that the entire world panders to religion and to religious people for fear of offending, and he doesn't really buy into it. Despite this he still remains largely civil and polite while making his points.

Maybe I've just happened to see the polite side of him *shrug*

storm2811

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well a lot of his views are pretty much synonymous with atheism in general, what do you not agree with?

I don't know,I know other atheists who don't like him either,it's the way he speaks of religion,as if it's a disease,in fact I think I remember him calling it a virus.
Just the way he goes on about it and people who believe in god/gods,like they're brainwashed and so on,always saying how religion is so bad and evil etc.

WesternNight

storm2811 wrote: »

I don't know,I know other atheists who don't like him either,it's the way he speaks of religion,as if it's a disease,in fact I think I remember him calling it a virus.
Just the way he goes on about it and people who believe in god/gods,like they're brainwashed and so on,always saying how religion is so bad and evil etc.

Do you feel the same about the way a lot of religious people talk about atheists? That they're lost, that they need to be pitied and prayed for, that they're incapable of being good people without god?

storm2811

WesternNight wrote: »

Do you feel the same about the way a lot of religious people talk about atheists? That they're lost, that they need to be pitied and prayed for, that they're incapable of being good people without god?

Yes,my religion teacher can be a dick like that,it's just people who are,not intolerant really but just seem to nit pick at other religions or those with lack of religion that gets to me.
It's like,I see his point,I've heard his views a million times over,why can't he just quit?

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

I don't know,I know other atheists who don't like him either,it's the way he speaks of religion,as if it's a disease,in fact I think I remember him calling it a virus.
Just the way he goes on about it and people who believe in god/gods,like they're brainwashed and so on,always saying how religion is so bad and evil etc.

Forgive me, but only recently you said that Dawkins' thinks teaching religion to children is child abuse, which is not the case. So can you provide some direct quotes please? I'm not denying that Dawkins has said any of these things, but context is important.

Or can you even link to an interview you saw with him that you didn't agree with? Or any clip of him talking to religious people in a way you disagreed with? Or where he was flat out wrong?

amacachi

storm2811 wrote: »

I don't know,I know other atheists who don't like him either,it's the way he speaks of religion,as if it's a disease,in fact I think I remember him calling it a virus.
Just the way he goes on about it and people who believe in god/gods,like they're brainwashed and so on,always saying how religion is so bad and evil etc.

I was like that until one thing he said just shattered the glass. Someone said that we must respect other peoples' beliefs and he just said "Why?".

WesternNight

storm2811 wrote: »

It's like,I see his point,I've heard his views a million times over,why can't he just quit?

Because he feels that it's too important an issue to just sit by and ignore.

WesternNight

amacachi wrote: »

I was like that until one thing he said just shattered the glass. Someone said that we must respect other peoples' beliefs and he just said "Why?".

I was exactly the same. For years I'd sat back and shut up because you're supposed to just grin and bear it if you don't agree with someone about religion. It would occur to me occasionally that it was strange that it was ok for religious people to talk about atheists like they didn't matter, but not ok for atheists (me) to say anything against religion because it would offend. It never made sense to me but it took reading some of Dawkins' stuff to actually realise that, in fact, it isn't ok. Not by a long shot.

storm2811

MagicMarker wrote: »

Forgive me, but only recently you said that Dawkins' thinks teaching religion to children is child abuse, which is not the case. So can you provide some direct quotes please? I'm not denying that Dawkins has said any of these things, but context is important.

Or can you even link to an interview you saw with him that you didn't agree with? Or any clip of him talking to religious people in a way you disagreed with? Or where he was flat out wrong?

He said it in the documentary on which the thread title is based didn't he?Or pretty much said it.
Pretty much all of them,he also just seems to talk to the looniest religious fanatics he can find just to prove his point.
I don't think he was "wrong" I just do not agree with him and that's it really.
I'm sure you don't agree with many religious figures,how is this different?

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

He said it in the documentary on which the thread title is based didn't he?Or pretty much said it.
Pretty much all of them,he also just seems to talk to the looniest religious fanatics he can find just to prove his point.
I don't think he was "wrong" I just do not agree with him and that's it really.
I'm sure you don't agree with many religious figures,how is this different?

You don't think he's wrong, but you don't agree with him.......?

You're right, I don't agree with many religious figures when they start talking about ''Gods plan'', or ''Condoms cause aids'' or ''homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights''.

I think the difference is very clear.

Do you think these ''religious fanatics'' are somehow insignificant and should be just ignored?

storm2811

MagicMarker wrote: »

You don't think he's wrong, but you don't agree with him.......?

You're right, I don't agree with many religious figures when they start talking about ''Gods plan'', or ''Condoms cause aids'' or ''homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights''.

I think the difference is very clear.

Do you think these ''religious fanatics'' are somehow insignificant and should be just ignored?

No I don't think he's entirely wrong,I agree with his views on evolution,abortion and gay marriage but just not his main views on religion.

As in Ted Haggard and that woman in the interview that was posted a while ago?
I don't think they should be ignored,everyone has views(no matter how ridiculous) but I think they should get toned down a bit alright.

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

No I don't think he's entirely wrong,I agree with his views on evolution,abortion and gay marriage but just not his main views on religion.

As in Ted Haggard and that woman in the interview that was posted a while ago?
I don't think they should be ignored,everyone has views(no matter how ridiculous) but I think they should get toned down a bit alright.

Why should they be toned down? Why shouldn't religious moderates be toned down?

What are his main views on religion that you do not agree with?

storm2811

MagicMarker wrote: »

Why should they be toned down? Why shouldn't religious moderates be toned down?

What are his main views on religion that you do not agree with?

Well because they take it to the extreme,too far if you get me.
I've mentioned them above,the way he talks about it like it's a disease,that something is wrong with a person if they believe in a god.

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

Well because they take it to the extreme,too far if you get me.
I've mentioned them above,the way he talks about it like it's a disease,that something is wrong with a person if they believe in a god.

Again, can you provide quotes? A link? Anything at all?

Yes, they take it too far, but from talking with you before you still believe they should be allowed to have their child taught creationism don't you?

storm2811

MagicMarker wrote: »

Again, can you provide quotes? A link? Anything at all?

Yes, they take it too far, but from talking with you before you still believe they should be allowed to have their child taught creationism don't you?

He said in the documentary!
It's a virus,they're deluded and so on and so on.

Yeah,it's their children,I'm not going to tell them what to do.

WesternNight

storm2811 wrote: »

Yeah,it's their children,I'm not going to tell them what to do.

Even if it's wrong? Just let them teach them whatever because they're their kids?

MagicMarker

storm2811 wrote: »

He said in the documentary!
It's a virus,they're deluded and so on and so on.

Yeah,it's their children,I'm not going to tell them what to do.

So you're not going to provide any quotes what so ever then?

You think they take things to the extreme, but you don't care that they do that with their children. Sorry, but that's a truly despicable attitude to have tbh. That's the kind of moral relativism the world can do without.

mikhail

For what it's worth, I used feel the same way about Dawkins, and having read one of his books (The Blind Watchmaker), I was rather uninspired (it was boring, repetitive and told me nothing new). However, I've seen more of him speaking in person since, and I've found my initial impression of him as arrogant and obnoxious was off. He's mostly fairly respectful. I reckon his more insensitive comments just get more press.

storm2811

WesternNight wrote: »

Even if it's wrong? Just let them teach them whatever because they're their kids?

Yes.How would you react if I told you you were a bad parent because you were teaching your children your views on life and religion?
Not very impressed I presume.

MagicMarker wrote: »

So you're not going to provide any quotes what so ever then?

You think they take things to the extreme, but you don't care that they do that with their children. Sorry, but that's a truly despicable attitude to have tbh. That's the kind of moral relativism the world can do without.

I don't where to look for quotes but it was in The God Delusion which on the other night and you should know,you did watch it.
He clearly described it as a virus and said that they were deluded.

They are their children for goodness sake,see above and tell me how you would react also.

I'm sorry for my "despicable" attitude but it will most likely not change.

WesternNight

Out of curiosity...does it only apply to religious teachings? Or can parents tell their children to believe anything they want? Is there a line that you think shouldn't be crossed?

storm2811

WesternNight wrote: »

Out of curiosity...does it only apply to religious teachings? Or can parents tell their children to believe anything they want? Is there a line that you think shouldn't be crossed?

Well obviously I wouldn't agree with some things but what can I do about it?
Let the parents teach them what they want,I mightn't like,nor would a lot of people but I can hardly burst into their homes and tell them to cop the fuck on.

WesternNight

storm2811 wrote: »

Well obviously I wouldn't agree with some things but what can I do about it?
Let the parents teach them what they want,I mightn't like,nor would a lot of people but I can hardly burst into their homes and tell them to cop the fuck on.

Ah yeah, sure what can any of us do? Why bother trying to educate people or any of that stuff, it's pointless anyway, right?

That attitude makes me really sad, I have to say.

storm2811

WesternNight wrote: »

Ah yeah, sure what can any of us do? Why bother trying to educate people or any of that stuff, it's pointless anyway, right?

That attitude makes me really sad, I have to say.

I do try and educate people,people I know and others,I do the best I can without being interfering.
I would hardly go up to some neo nazi with their child and say "Hey,stop that,it's wrong" and suffer getting the crap beat out of me or worse,would you?

WesternNight

storm2811 wrote: »

I would hardly go up to some neo nazi with their child and say "Hey,stop that,it's wrong" and suffer getting the crap beat out of me or worse,would you?

No-one suggested you should do that.

storm2811

WesternNight wrote: »

No-one suggested you should do that.

Well then what?
How can I stop people from teaching their children what they wish?
You're being a tad unrealistic I'd say.

philologos

robindch wrote: »

Playing the "religious persecution" card only works when there actually is persecution. Playing it when there isn't just makes you look silly.

It looks silly, because it was intended to be silly!

I said immediately afterwards:

Admittedly, I was having a little fun

robindch

Jakkass wrote: »

It looks silly, because it was intended to be silly!

Dang, bitten by Poe's Law!

philologos

MagicMarker wrote: »

I'm sorry to say but you're being very closed minded regarding Dawkins, it's unfortunate, especially when you just ignore other people's work because of it.

There are better sources for skepticism than Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, or Dennett.

Dare I say, David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Albert Camus would give you a better introduction to it than any of the aforementioned 4.

MagicMarker

Jakkass wrote: »

There are better sources for skepticism than Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, or Dennett.

Dare I say, David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Albert Camus would give you a better introduction to it than any of the aforementioned 4.

I'm sure Storm can't wait to read 'em.

robindch

Jakkass wrote: »

There are better sources for skepticism than Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, or Dennett. Dare I say, David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Albert Camus would give you a better introduction to it than any of the aforementioned 4.

Dare all you like, but while Hume and to a lesser extent Nietzsche, certainly added to the sum total of human knowledge, neither of them could string a clear sentence together to save their lives. I have no idea what Camus is doing on your list.

Of the four you've dismissed, Dawkins is by far the best writer on skepticism, though I suspect the views of Dawkins that religious people imbibe from sources other than Dawkins himself are likely to prejudice them against him permanently