TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Is atheism/agnosticism the trend now?
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

They are no more "running a racket" than any other author promoting a book.

Anyway, if you don't believe in any gods, you are an atheist. Regardless of whether you think that the dreaded label tarnishes your oh-so-complex ideas and sentiments about religion.

Atheists don't all belong to a single unified "church" any more than theists do.

I don't get why it is so important to read famous and smart authors about religon and/or atheism. I mean, as an agnostic, the only religious books I'd read would be the Bible and the Quran and maybe a few books about religion and its history.

But why would I read a book which talks about beliefs and trying to prove a certain point of view and rejecting the others?

I think beliefs are deeply intimate and I don't want someone to tell me what to or not to believe...

quote:

Originally posted by Vector A They are no more "running a racket" than any other author promoting a book. Anyway, if you don't believe in any gods, you are an atheist. Regardless of whether you think that the dreaded label tarnishes your oh-so-complex ideas and sentiments about religion. Atheists don't all belong to a single unified "church" any more than theists do.

I agree and I'm glad you brought attention to book sales that some atheists clearly care about. (Not blaming them, if I wrote a book I'd want people to read it and make money off it)

I often wonder if Dawkins is less vehement and aggressive in his beliefs outside of the public eye and that his scathing comments towards religious types is some sort of gimmick.

I've read neither author but I'd assume they're presenting ideas in a combative manner to attract rating/sales. We wouldn't be talking about them if it didn't work.

I don't think it's quite that simple. Much of Dawkins' anger comes from the ways that religion around the world is used as a way of controlling people, from oppressive religious law that enforces patriarchal social structures to the way children are indoctrinated from an age where they're too young to make a decision for themselves. And some of it probably comes from the way some religious institutes try and defy or appropriate science, which is no doubt infuriating to a scientist like Dawkins.

As I said before though, Dawkins is really a preacher to the already-converted. He might argue publicly with and against religious figureheads and institutions, but he's not really talking to them. He's actually directing his message at a certain kind of atheist: the arrogant, self-congratulatory atheist who smugly believes themselves to be more rational and intelligent for seeing through the "children's stories" of religion and confronting the truth of reality without a "comfort blanket". That's Dawkins' audience. His entire body of work is one giant pat on the back for the self-regarding atheists of the world. His belligerent style doesn't make any attempt to reach out to the religious and convince them of anything. It's a polemic to be repeated by people who already agree with Richard Dawkins.

I can see trying to level the playing field. Religious people have an organization, thousands years of history, religious texts, millions of believer and countless experts/scholars. All of which adds legitimacy to their beliefs and is a daunting for an individual to hold his own against.

I bet Richard Dawkins has a really small dick and that's what drives all his THERE IS NO GODDDDDD stuff.


Plus he looks like a cunt and has a really fuckin irritating shitty voice.


Just a thought.

His dick is so small microbiologists don't have the technology or skills to study it.

Holy shit what a burn!

I like Dick.

No, pretty much for this reason:

quote:

Originally posted by Jon_Snow There are no female atheists in the bedroom.

For the record, this joke only work in English, to my knowledge

In most other languages girls just moan or squeak, really.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira For the record, this joke only work in English, to my knowledge In most other languages girls just moan or squeak, really.

You know nothing

quote:

Originally posted by JaredFogle I like Dick.

Yeah little kid dick... Aren't you in jail?

quote:

Originally posted by bluegmt I don't get why it is so important to read famous and smart authors about religon and/or atheism. I mean, as an agnostic, the only religious books I'd read would be the Bible and the Quran and maybe a few books about religion and its history. But why would I read a book which talks about beliefs and trying to prove a certain point of view and rejecting the others? I think beliefs are deeply intimate and I don't want someone to tell me what to or not to believe...

It is important, because politicians make decisions based on their belief and their decisions affect everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J As I said before though, Dawkins is really a preacher to the already-converted. He might argue publicly with and against religious figureheads and institutions, but he's not really talking to them. He's actually directing his message at a certain kind of atheist: the arrogant, self-congratulatory atheist who smugly believes themselves to be more rational and intelligent for seeing through the "children's stories" of religion and confronting the truth of reality without a "comfort blanket". That's Dawkins' audience. His entire body of work is one giant pat on the back for the self-regarding atheists of the world. His belligerent style doesn't make any attempt to reach out to the religious and convince them of anything. It's a polemic to be repeated by people who already agree with Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins' audience is both atheists and undecided or religious people. There are people that decided to come out as atheist thanks to him, so I guess his style does work for some people

Rofl "come out as atheists"

quote:

Originally posted by Silky Johnson Rofl "come out as atheists"

yeah try telling your 90yo grandma you don't believe in a Saddam Hussein in the sky. It will break her heart

In your face, grandma!

quote:

Originally posted by stren It is important, because politicians make decisions based on their belief and their decisions affect everyone.

That's definitely not the case in France.

quote:

Originally posted by bluegmt That's definitely not the case in France.

grats, unfortunately this cannot be said for some other countries

Whats with all these atheists threads? This forum is obsessed with religion and atheism.

quote:

Originally posted by de+ Whats with all these atheists threads? This forum is obsessed with religion and atheism.

SHUT UP, GRANDMA.

I love saudi women and burkas

I'm not a well read atheist. I take my atheism on faith.

While I'm certainly no Dawkins or Hitchens apologizer, you have to factor in that when they started their crusades (lol) atheism did not have the level of acceptance or maybe indifference it has now.

Dawkins first book on it was in the mid 70's and caused a massive stir, and got him a slew of death threats, so I don't really think it's surprising or even unwarranted that he may have a bit of an attitude these days.

I do agree with Jack that he's preaching to the converted and a lot of what he does not is a massive auto-back-pat, but then again he's really just making money like every single author does, by playing to their crowd. It's endemic in every field or self publicity from politicians to musicians, so why should he do anything differnt?

I will say there seem to be a lot of people chiming in about about Dawkins and Hitchens that have never read their books and especially Dawkins' book, the God Delusion goes a long way to very precisely explain why he has such vitriol against religion;

You have to realize that in certain countries, namely the USA, you are perceived as a social leper or even professionally sidelined if you don't believe,

Bear in mind it's basically impossible to get elected to office without putting up a solid religious stance.

Then you haver things like George Bush (Dubya) saying in regards to tough and complex decisions he had to make, "imma' pray on it". Atheists don't like that major policy decisions are being made on 2000 year old fairytales.

If you were to take one thing from Dawkins though, it's how well he explains the bias for religion in our society, as in it's widespread acceptance of a possible reality, rather then it having to prove this ancient story - in essence he's angry that he has to "disprove" religion when there is no proof that it exists.

His biggest peeves though are that religion is forced on to children and that adults are forced to live or behave a certain way due to religion, whether or not you like him, you can't deny he's right.

Here's some choice cuts from him:

"As a scientist, I am hostile to fundamentalist religion because it actively debauches the scientific enterprise. It teaches us not to change our minds, and not to want to know exciting things that are available to be known. It subverts science and saps the intellect.�

"Of 43 studies carried out since 1927 on the relationship between religious belief and one�s intelligence and/or educational level, all but four found an inverse connection. That is, the higher one�s intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold �beliefs� of any kind."

�All the Founding Fathers, whatever their private religious beliefs, would have been aghast to read the journalist Robert Sherman�s report of George Bush Senior�s answer when Sherman asked him whether he recognized the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists: �No, I don�t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.�

I do understand why he's a dick, if for nothing else than because religion needs someone to be a dick to it.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.