Posts: 523
Threads: 1
Joined: May 22, 2012
Reputation:
9
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 3:22 am
(July 4, 2012 at 3:17 am)fr0d0 Wrote: (July 3, 2012 at 5:23 pm)dean211284 Wrote: How can anyone say Dawkins is an ignoramus? The guy knows more about the subjects he speaks of than most fools who like to think they know more such as Craig or Lennox. Religion needs to provide evidence of its outlandish claims before it has a leg to stand on. But we all know it can't.
Dawkins is a good scientist. This is his specialism. He had some crazy opposition from the usual religious crazies and understandably retaliated. He writes clearly and well, and found himself suddenly a best selling author. Rich on the back of a popularist ignorant perspective. Anyone doing slightly more than scratching the surface sees this for what it is: unadulterated ignorance.
Yes, your sad attempt to dismiss him does indeed betray your unadulterated ignorance.
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 7:38 am
(July 4, 2012 at 3:22 am)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: Yes, your sad attempt to dismiss him does indeed betray your unadulterated ignorance. What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
Subtext: shut the fuck up you asshole unless you have an actual point to make. Let's see some evidence of you thinking that it's actually possible to respond to. Troll. /rant 
Posts: 276
Threads: 3
Joined: August 20, 2011
Reputation:
6
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 7:57 am
How much knowledge of any religion do you really need to have to dismiss it as bullshit?
I don't think I have to be a world-class scientist or a recognized and accomplished philosopher to look at the basis of the claims presented and rip them apart.
Similarly, I don't think that Dawkins, a man much more intelligent than myself, should have trouble writing a book dismantling this useless religious prattle. I would have hoped we could grow out of it as a species, but that seems neigh impossible with today's unquestioning fuckwits. Don't think I'm singling out any one person- I'm not.
Ignorance isn't a bad thing. It informs of of what we don't yet have a grasp on and allows us to improve ourselves. It also informs our decisions. However, religion is a decidedly obsolete system that rolled over from the age of human ignorance.
I would say that you need no expertiese in Islam or Christianity to dismiss it. It doesn't require in-depth comprehension, and otherwise, you would be speding your whole life attampting to divine (harhar) the true religion.
Dawkins is anything but ignorant and more than qualfied to pull religion out of its dust-proof casing and stomp on it for a bit.
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
Posts: 523
Threads: 1
Joined: May 22, 2012
Reputation:
9
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 10:11 am
(July 4, 2012 at 7:38 am)fr0d0 Wrote: (July 4, 2012 at 3:22 am)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: Yes, your sad attempt to dismiss him does indeed betray your unadulterated ignorance. What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
Which Hitch famously applied to your sky fairy. Dawkins is a scientist, but his knowledge and understanding of the world is not at all limited to his scientific field as you would lead folks to think. He is not at all a one note johnny like you.
[qutoe]Subtext: shut the fuck up you asshole unless you have an actual point to make. Let's see some evidence of you thinking that it's actually possible to respond to. Troll. /rant
[/quote]
Spoken like a True Christian™. And of course the truth stings your sorry ass, but you bleating at me over the internet isn't going to shut me up for a second.
Posts: 532
Threads: 5
Joined: January 30, 2012
Reputation:
5
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 10:12 am
Has anyone here read the works of more recent Christian thinkers, like Plantinga, Tillich, van Inwagen, etc.? I wonder if the people who think that religion is merely a relic of the Dark Ages are familiar with the work being done in the philosophy of religion. Are metaphysics and the philosophy of the mind also merely relics of an age of ignorance?
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
Posts: 523
Threads: 1
Joined: May 22, 2012
Reputation:
9
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 10:37 am
(This post was last modified: July 4, 2012 at 10:38 am by Taqiyya Mockingbird.)
(July 4, 2012 at 10:12 am)CliveStaples Wrote: Has anyone here read the works of more recent Christian thinkers, like Plantinga, Tillich, van Inwagen, etc.? I wonder if the people who think that religion is merely a relic of the Dark Ages are familiar with the work being done in the philosophy of religion. Are metaphysics and the philosophy of the mind also merely relics of an age of ignorance?
You seriously believe that reading more commentaries to your superstitious fairy tales is going to somehow make them any less of fairy tales?
LMAO
Posts: 532
Threads: 5
Joined: January 30, 2012
Reputation:
5
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 11:17 am
(July 4, 2012 at 10:37 am)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: You seriously believe that reading more commentaries to your superstitious fairy tales is going to somehow make them any less of fairy tales?
LMAO
You seriously believe that reading philosophy that you are inclined to disagree with is pointless?
You seriously believe that calling a set of beliefs "fairy tales" is meaningful, when you aren't even aware of what that set of beliefs is?
It's as though you think there's a slick proof that every belief system that implements theism must be ridiculous. If there is one, can you point me to it?
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 12:04 pm
Plantinga is interesting, but really rather a Platonist. His god as the creator of all abstractions notion seems to require massive semantic manipulation to work. Not that he isn't brilliant. Certainly Plato was, as were Augustine, et al. Worth reading, but fraught with necessarily esoteric problems which seem best suited to obfuscating the problem against which atheism reacts, namely a lack of evidence for god or gods.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 532
Threads: 5
Joined: January 30, 2012
Reputation:
5
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 12:14 pm
(July 4, 2012 at 12:04 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Plantinga is interesting, but really rather a Platonist. His god as the creator of all abstractions notion seems to require massive semantic manipulation to work. Not that he isn't brilliant. Certainly Plato was, as were Augustine, et al. Worth reading, but fraught with necessarily esoteric problems which seem best suited to obfuscating the problem against which atheism reacts, namely a lack of evidence for god or gods.
I agree with the resemblance to Plato--I'm inclined toward abstraction myself--but I think that if theism turns out to actually be important, it's going to be precisely because of a lack of evidence for it.
That is, if theism is to have importance, it can't be because it's really just a subset of science. Otherwise, it's really just undiscovered science. If it's going to truly be important, and important in the way that theists generally believe that it's important, it will have to be an account of reality that is consistent with science (i.e., does not deny rationality or our knowledge of the universe) and yet gives an account that science cannot. Pretty much Stephen Jay Gould's non-overlapping magisteria.
At least, that's my suspicion.
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: The debate is over
July 4, 2012 at 6:32 pm
(This post was last modified: July 4, 2012 at 6:36 pm by fr0d0.)
(July 4, 2012 at 7:57 am)Skepsis Wrote: How much knowledge of any religion do you really need to have to dismiss it as bullshit?
Turn that around.. How much knowledge if science do you need to dismiss it as bullshit?
Are you seriously championing ignorance as a prefferred method of selection?
(July 4, 2012 at 7:57 am)Skepsis Wrote: Similarly, I don't think that Dawkins, a man much more intelligent than myself, should have trouble writing a book dismantling this useless religious prattle. This is what being a sheep entails. You defer your own decisions to a third party.
(July 4, 2012 at 7:57 am)Skepsis Wrote: Ignorance isn't a bad thing. It informs of of what we don't yet have a grasp on and allows us to improve ourselves. It also informs our decisions. Wow.
I hope you really meant to say that it's OK to say "I don't know".
(July 4, 2012 at 7:57 am)Skepsis Wrote: However, religion is a decidedly obsolete system that rolled over from the age of human ignorance.
No. Religion is not science, and it's ignorant of you to assume that it is.
(July 4, 2012 at 10:11 am)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: you bleating at me over the internet isn't going to shut me up for a second.
Evidently.
Seemingly I'm not going to get any opinion from you either. Ah well.
|
