News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

The God Delusion

Started by Satt, July 14, 2013, 04:55:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Plu

I'm guessing the real problem is that you think that writing a book to point out the problems in religion should be a complicated, philosophical work, when in reality all you need to point out the problems in religion is a very small amount of common sense.

Satt

Just an update...I stopped reading The God Delusion about 3/4 of the way through and read the book God is not Great by Christopher Hitchens. I like it a lot better so far. For some reason, Hitchens connects with me better than Dawkins. I am definately more solidly an Agnostic now.
Quote from: \"the_antithesis\"We\'re a bunch of twats on the internet. We can\'t help you. You should see a psychologist.

Shiranu

"The God Delusion" and "The Greatest Show On Earth" were the two books that really pushed me into atheism. TGD is very... common sensical I find, but if that's something you weren't introduced to then it has its uses.
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Krampus

I don't quite understand why everyone here appears to defend Dawkins. It is perfectly fine to be a nontheist and to disagree with Dawkins and to find him shallow and biased when he deals with philosophy and theology.

There are good arguments for atheism out there, but The God Delusion does not come close to making them.

Shiranu

"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Plu

QuoteI don't quite understand why everyone here appears to defend Dawkins. It is perfectly fine to be a nontheist and to disagree with Dawkins and to find him shallow and biased when he deals with philosophy and theology.

I'm guessing... because we don't consider him to be shallow and biased.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: "Krampus"I don't quite understand why everyone here appears to defend Dawkins. It is perfectly fine to be a nontheist and to disagree with Dawkins and to find him shallow and biased when he deals with philosophy and theology.
Because he's not that shallow or biased at all. If something is ridiculous, you don't need to delve that deeply in your explanation of why it's ridiculous. This is why I generally do not get in-depth in my explanations of why, for example, the Bible is bullshit. I could go in-depth, but it is not required because I can give a far simpler explanation.

Quote from: "Krampus"There are good arguments for atheism out there, but The God Delusion does not come close to making them.
You don't have to argue for atheism, because atheism is not a position. It is a term we use for a lack of a position, which is only necessary because we live in a world where people have adopted this bewildering presumption that theism should be an assumption rather than a provable position.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Colanth

Quote from: "Krampus"There are good arguments for atheism out there, but The God Delusion does not come close to making them.
Again, atheism doesn't need an argument, it's the default position.

Theism is what needs an argument, and so far no one has come up with one, except "I need to believe" (in one form of statement or another).  And that's nice - for the person making that argument, but not a reason anyone else should become a theist.

Only theists see a need for an argument for atheism.  Atheists just don't see any argument for theism.  (Or any need for it.)
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

GurrenLagann

Finished reading the God Delusion...

I thought it was meh. I mean, there are a number of serious arguments for God's existence and a number of counter-arguments from our side. I didn't find (nor expect) Dawkins to be particularly insightful (outside his areas of expertise) and that seems to be the case.

Overall, I think I'd have to more or less side with Krampus on this.
Which means that to me the offer of certainty, the offer of complete security, the offer of an impermeable faith that can\'t give way, is the offer of something not worth having.
[...]
Take the risk of thinking for yourself. Much more happiness, truth, beauty & wisdom, will come to you that way.
-Christopher Hitchens

Eric1958

Quote from: "Colanth"
Quote from: "Krampus"There are good arguments for atheism out there, but The God Delusion does not come close to making them.
Again, atheism doesn't need an argument, it's the default position.

Theism is what needs an argument, and so far no one has come up with one, except "I need to believe" (in one form of statement or another).  And that's nice - for the person making that argument, but not a reason anyone else should become a theist.

Only theists see a need for an argument for atheism.  Atheists just don't see any argument for theism.  (Or any need for it.)


Ok, I have to take issue with the statement that atheism is the "default" position. I have two reasons.

A)  almost all cultures throughout history have developed a creation myth. It is the nature of humans to sit and contemplate the origin of life. Most may not be much good at noodling it out, but you got to admit we've sure come up with a shit load of wild and crazy ideas. Some of the native groups up here had a cool story about the great raven who got the ball rolling. I think they should have stuck with that instead of letting those pesky catholics convert them. But I digress. If atheism was our default position we wouldn't be so easily swayed by the village priest.

B)  I don't know how many times I've talked to a Christian and been told "see that tree, if there's no God..."   you know how that goes. Point is, we might say that atheism feels like the default position, but the theists are just as firm about believing that there's is the default position.

So, I'm sorry, but I think we need to explain ourselves with logic and even more importantly with some very good facts.

Youssuf Ramadan

Quote from: "Eric1958"Ok, I have to take issue with the statement that atheism is the "default" position.

As far as I'm concerned, when a baby is born it is not religious.  Religiosity comes through being told what to believe by others, or maybe by a need in later life.  So theoretically, the child is born atheist.  I was born with no belief in unicorns, therefore my default setting was a-unicorn-ist.

It also depends what someone understands by the term 'atheist'.   For me an atheist is someone who holds no belief in god.  For others, an atheist is a slavering and vociferous anti-god mouthpiece .  Sometimes language can get in the way of the argument.

At the very least, one could say agnosticism is the default position. Maybe that works better?

Solitary

I'm a six, and will be a seven when I can prove there isn't a god or anything else that doesn't make any logical sense without any empirical evidence.   :-k   If God came back and stopped all the pain and suffering in the world, I'd be a one that worshipped Him.  :-D  If He just came back I'd be a one, but sure as hell wouldn't worship Him like He was some celebrity that deserved respect.  [-X  :evil:  :twisted:  Solitary
There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.

Colanth

Quote from: "Eric1958"Ok, I have to take issue with the statement that atheism is the "default" position.
Not accepting an assertion that seems, at best, foolish on its face and for which no evidence has been provided (that's what the "God exists" argument is) is the default position. I have two reasons.

QuoteA)  almost all cultures throughout history have developed a creation myth. It is the nature of humans to sit and contemplate the origin of life. Most may not be much good at noodling it out, but you got to admit we've sure come up with a shit load of wild and crazy ideas. Some of the native groups up here had a cool story about the great raven who got the ball rolling. I think they should have stuck with that instead of letting those pesky catholics convert them. But I digress. If atheism was our default position we wouldn't be so easily swayed by the village priest.
I didn't say that human beings default to not believing in God, I said that atheism is the default position.  The two are somewhat related, but they're nowhere near being the same.

QuoteB)  I don't know how many times I've talked to a Christian and been told "see that tree, if there's no God..."   you know how that goes. Point is, we might say that atheism feels like the default position, but the theists are just as firm about believing that there's is the default position.
We may feel like we defaulted to atheism, and they may feel like they defaulted to theism, but that has nothing to do with the default position, which is a logic thing.

QuoteSo, I'm sorry, but I think we need to explain ourselves with logic and even more importantly with some very good facts.
"Need to" implies a goal.  I don't have the goal of deconverting theists, so I don't need to explain myself.  Derisive laughter at people who are willfully ignorant suffices for me.  I do all this (posting on fora, studying religion, archaeology, etc.) for my own edification and enjoyment, not for any other reason.

Now if you have a need to deconvert Christians, then you need to explain yourself.  But atheism, as an entity, doesn't.
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Colanth

Quote from: "Youssuf Ramadan"At the very least, one could say agnosticism is the default position. Maybe that works better?
The default position when it comes to making statements for which we have no evidence, but that still doesn't address the default position vis-a-vis belief in a god.
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

BugRib

Krampus: "I don't quite understand why everyone here appears to defend Dawkins. It is perfectly fine to be a nontheist and to disagree with Dawkins and to find him shallow and biased when he deals with philosophy and theology.

There are good arguments for atheism out there, but The God Delusion does not come close to making them."


Dawkins' book could have made a "good argument[] for atheism" with just one sentence; "There is no good evidence for the existence of any gods."  That's it.  That's all he needed to write.

For you to claim that The God Delusion "does not come close to making them ["good arguments for atheism"]" is absurd.  Making a good argument for atheism is as easy as making a good argument for "a-unicorn-ism"--lack of evidence.  Period.