(October 23, 2015 at 11:37 pm)Delicate Wrote:(October 18, 2015 at 9:23 pm)Alex K Wrote: Have you considered the possibility that what you perceive as lack of substance in the criticism is actually lack of substance of the ideas which are being criticised?
You would like for there to be a more profound criticism of your religion, but maybe it just makes too little sense to lend itself to more meaningful comments.
This would be the go-to-defense for atheistic mediocrity, wouldn't it?
The fact is, however, that most atheists resort to distorted caricatures of religion rather than dealing with the thing in itself. So the question arises: Are these claims of the vacuity of religion a fact about religion, or a fact about the fictional caricatures of religion that atheists construct to keep their beliefs about religion on life-support?
The first step to an intellectually-honest critique of religion would involve dealing with the religion itself, as opposed to misrepresentations of the religion. Only once you go that route will you see that there's a lot more to the world than the atheist fishbowl.
You produce absolutely vacuous posts. I think you're nothing but a poseur who likes trying on various styles of criticism without ever coming face to face with the substance of them. The first step to intellectually honest anything is to drop the pretension.