Richard Dawkins - Anti -Christ or Great Thinker?

maybe just in being an arty, philosophically-inclined city dweller, i place myself in an invisibly fenced atheist's ghetto.

a fair assumption, really

is obama the first president (modern day at least) to include atheists and agnostics (though i think he uses a euphemistic term like 'nonbelievers' or something) alongside xians, jews, muslims, etc in the tapestry of america or whatever. i can't imagine bush feeling the need to be inclusive, can't recall clinton even approaching it, and there's no way any president before that would've even considered it. it's the one thing really i remember from his inauguration speech.

And thinking more on this religion/science/hostility/debunking thing, take, for example, supposed apparitions of the Virgin Mary. Those tend to be cases where:

- "Science" generally doesn't give two shits except for professional debunkers like Randi or some of the sciencebloggers like Phil Plait.
- The Catholic Church tends to be more skeptical and conservative about them than believers or the non skeptical mass media.
- Said believers get quite tetchy about rationalist explanations about the phenomena.

So we have science not caring, a skeptical church and unskeptical believers who don't want to know from science. What does that say about the relationship among those things? Something a lot more complex than your statement.

carrying on a bit, i do think that religion is in no way intrinsically hostile to science. in fact, for most of history, religion and science have gone hand in hand, with problems arising only when science seems to challenge religious myth or principle. or so it seems to me...

― contenderizer, Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:29 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

Religion isn't intrinsically hostile to anything. But it's intrinsically superstitious, and superstition and science are innately opposed.

Lots of polls since mid decade have shown how the number of self-described atheists has grown. Here's one. The success of Dawkins and Hitchens' books caused a concomitant rise in the number of stories reporting on the phenomenon.

I can't help but feel that figures like Dawkins might have helped some people come out of the closet (particularly some people who used to identify as agnostics but finally realized they were atheists) in a way that wouldn't have happened if he had been the polite, nuanced debater of theology that his detractors want him to be.

i've never moved in a social circle that didn't basically consider religious people retarded. so i have no data.

x-post: i can personally attest his "Selfish Gene" and "The Blind Watchmaker" were of great import to my teenaged atheist self.

All of my family on my mother's side, who were not exactly the churchiest people around when I was growing up, all found religion later in life, so you better believe I keep my atheism largely to myself. They aren't the kinds of folks who can be quiet about it. Even my dad, who I always figured to be an agnostic, has gotten very into "spirituality" following a bout with cancer.

Last Thanksgiving, I hosted my family and my in-laws at our house, and my own sister steamrolled me into having my wife's stepfather, a fundagelical minister, say grace. So, yeah.

But it's intrinsically superstitious, and superstition and science are innately opposed.

― Matt Armstrong, Wednesday, June 1, 2011 5:33 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark

that's too pejorative. i'd say that religion is inherently metaphysical and spiritual, and that spiritual metaphysics and science are innately different. the presumption that opposition is a necessary component of such difference is a pernicious fallacy.

lol @ the idea that atheists are a "despised minority"

lol @ the idea that atheists are a "despised minority"

― cop a cute abdomen (gbx), Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:43 AM (3 seconds ago) Bookmark

how are they not?

i think we're coming around to agreeing that scientists are a despised minority tbh

ppl may be reluctant to vote for an atheist (maybe), but i think that even to the most devout, atheists are, at worst, pitied, and at best, thought of as misguided

So we have science not caring, a skeptical church and unskeptical believers who don't want to know from science. What does that say about the relationship among those things? Something a lot more complex than your statement.

― Shart Shaped Box (Phil D.), Wednesday, June 1, 2011 5:32 PM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark

sure. but i was thinking of more dramatic examples, like christian hostility to the theory of evolution and scientific estimations of the age of our planet and universe.

few christians seem to have any abiding objection to the application and development of science in ways that don't impinge upon the cherished beliefs of the faithful (i.e., most science).

As an atheist, I've a constitutional aversion to self-pity.

ppl may be reluctant to vote for an atheist (maybe), but i think that even to the most devout, atheists are, at worst, pitied, and at best, thought of as misguided

― cop a cute abdomen (gbx), Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:45 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

Among all minority groups, Atheists were the one that most people said they would not allow their children to marry.

who cares

also, it's not "maybe." 48 percent of people say they would NEVER vote for an atheist. And that's one of the lower poll results.

xp

srsly the only ppl that get het up about "atheists as a minority" are white dudes who want to have something to rail against

how do you go from "oh that poor, pitiable atheist" to "I refuse to let you become a part of my family," gbx?

All we need is an atheist with nerve, rhetorical clarity, and the instincts to know which way the winds are blowing to declare himself for public office.

good luck hailing a cab if you're an atheist amirite

Yeah keep that in mind when we can't do anything about global warming because of Republican Jesus.

As a homo and an atheist, I belong to two pitiable minorities, but neither my family nor my legislature have shunned me for the latter.

"atheists as a minority"

as you yourself said: atheists can hide or gloss their beliefs. anyone cynical enough to run for a major public office (ie one where a person's spiritual beliefs are scrutinized) will just say they're religious and make some anemic gestures to piety. no one's losing their job or getting spit on in public for not believing in god

As a homo and an atheist, I belong to two pitiable minorities, but neither my family nor my legislature have shunned me for the latter.

― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, June 1, 2011 7:51 PM (21 seconds ago) Bookmark S

this bears repeating

srsly the only ppl that get het up about "atheists as a minority" are white dudes who want to have something to rail against

― cop a cute abdomen (gbx), Wednesday, June 1, 2011 5:49 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

i don't know that this is true, but i feel that that this is true, spiritually. they are awful, angry libertarian grumpus people looking for something to be aggrieved about.

we're still a minority, bro

i don't know that this is true, but i feel that that this is true, spiritually. they are awful, angry libertarian grumpus people looking for something to be aggrieved about.

― contenderizer, Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:53 AM (26 seconds ago) Bookmark

LOL

thx for sharing your spiritual feelings

as difficult listening hour implicitly said a few posts ago, the paranoia of liberals increases by the extent to which they surround themselves with people who think like them.

as you yourself said: atheists can hide or gloss their beliefs. anyone cynical enough to run for a major public office (ie one where a person's spiritual beliefs are scrutinized) will just say they're religious and make some anemic gestures to piety. no one's losing their job or getting spit on in public for not believing in god

― cop a cute abdomen (gbx), Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:52 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

Gay people can use the closet too. It's fucked up in both cases.

lol phil do you think republicans want to defund the epa cuz of jesus???? really?

Gay people can use the closet too. It's fucked up in both cases.

wait waht

no it's not

no one's denying that atheists are a minority. it's just that....as a straight white dude atheist/agnostic/"buddhist", i think it would be grotesque to claim that my beliefs are in some way hindering my ability to succeed or w/e

matt srsly what is your stake in this?

It IS fucked up that the only way for an atheist to become a part of government is to lie about themselves.

My mom is more aggrieved by my homosexuality than my atheism, and no doubt wishes I would recant both, but no way are the two comparable!

matt you tell me something atheists aren't legally allowed to do that xians are allowed to do in america and i'll tell you something gays aren't legally allowed to do in america but straights are. let's see who runs out first.

It IS fucked up that the only way for an atheist to become a part of government is to lie about themselves.

There are plenty of local and congressional races in which religion doesn't come up at all. I don't see this as an ethical compromise.

"no one's losing their job or getting spit on in public for not believing in god"

ORLY? http://democracyforamerica.com/blog_posts/27752-texas-teacher-suspended-for-being-liberal-and-an-atheist

So we've got s sample size of two: Alfred and this dude. Text to vote!

My mom is more aggrieved by my homosexuality than my atheism, and no doubt wishes I would recant both, but no way are the two comparable!

― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:58 AM (17 seconds ago) Bookmark

my point was when it comes to getting elected to congress, they are totally comparable (Barney Frank being a notable exception).

like i'm honestly v sorry if ppl have been cruel to you because you're an atheist, but to suggest that it's some kind of social impediment in the larger sense is just wildly off-base

xp balls otm

no offense, Phil, but that's a blog post by a guy with an interest in the case.

like i'm honestly v sorry if ppl have been cruel to you because you're an atheist, but to suggest that it's some kind of social impediment in the larger sense is just wildly off-base
― cop a cute abdomen (gbx), Thursday, June 2, 2011 1:00 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

How could it not be a social impediment if I have to lie about it in order to be elected to Congress?

it is amazing how our prisons are overcrowded w/ young atheist men. and don't get me started on arizona.

i dont really care if atheists are discriminated against because theyre so annoying

Blame if you wish the puerility of my belief system, but winking at your would-be constituents about your faith is as innocuous as bringing your wife and children onstage to adduce your commitment to Family Values.