(October 11, 2013 at 10:25 pm)Zazzy Wrote: No offense, OP, but Sam Harris wrote an entire book about this some years ago (The End of Faith). The point was valid then, and it's still valid, and you do a nice job explaining it here, but I still recommend the book.
And if you do get replies from theists, they won't be direct and coherent.
Thanks, Zazzy.
I had heard about Harris' book, but I haven't read it.
I like that atheists can come to the same conclusion from different starting points. While the argument from popularity doesn't carry weight, that the same conclusion can be reached by applying reason and logic, regardless where someone kicks off their inquiry, looks a hell of a lot better than the religious model, where people start at the same position and often reach diametrically opposed conclusions.
I will look up Harris' book when I get the chance, but there's a lot on my shelf awaiting attention, and my experience of Harris at the Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne, 2012, left him well down the list of people I feel compelled to give much of my time to.
I am accustomed to theists giving indirect and less than coherent responses to the challenging questions I try to present them with. That doesn't rule out the process of presenting the questions having merit. While the theists I address directly are unlikely to change, the invisible audience, those who read but don't contribute, or who might stumble upon the dialogue later, are the target in most of my attempts to communicate with theists.
Cheers
Matt
