Comments on: The Atheists – A short review

By: Cc cleaner

Cc cleaner — Fri, 21 May 2010 11:39:12 +0000

reminds me a bit of a Hudson River School piece..the colors and reflection so soft and warm. Lovely.

By: SeandBlogonaut

SeandBlogonaut — Tue, 12 May 2009 23:14:01 +0000

Can you give me an example of what you are talking about. I far degree of criticism of Dawkins I have run across has been criticism of what people have thought he has said, or they put forward strawman arguments – Alister McGrath has been guilty of this.

You should as though you might have come across some more indepth, valid criticism, would appreciate if you would share

By: _cl

_cl — Tue, 12 May 2009 22:56:28 +0000

I've been reading quality critiques of Creationism for over two decades now. Perhaps the mainstream just wasn't searching diligently enough? I'm just discouraged that a significant subset of atheists have become apologists for Dawkins.

By: SeandBlogonaut

SeandBlogonaut — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:18:11 +0000

To years ago I wasn't hearing a peep about Creationism/Atheism so the the proponents of quality obviously weren't being vocal enough.

At least people are talking, hearing listening. I think the cost is negligible.

By: _cl

_cl — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:09:39 +0000

You said, " I tend to think that Dawkins and Harris vocal approach has resulted in a boon for both skepticism and atheism."

Sure, but at what cost? I'm a "quality over quantity" type of guy. My problem with Dawkins isn't so much his style, but the substance of his arguments. High-school oversights from Ph.D scholars raise valid concerns and I wish he would stick to writing on his area of expertise.

By: SeandBlogonaut

SeandBlogonaut — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 08:32:55 +0000

Moreover, there are some subsets of Christians that need to feel persecuted and need scapegoats to blame for their troubles

not necessarily just christians either:D

By: SeandBlogonaut

SeandBlogonaut — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 08:31:37 +0000

I think that some Christians view Dawkins very presence an affront much the same way a black man walking into a white bar would have been met with indignation

By: SeandBlogonaut

SeandBlogonaut — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 08:29:01 +0000

the Chaplian said fuck

By: the chaplain

the chaplain — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 23:35:59 +0000

Fuck – correction needed:
They don't like having their privileged position – which they view as normative and "the way things should be" – challenged….

By: the chaplain

the chaplain — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 23:34:41 +0000

I don’t think Dawkins does set out to be antagonistic, he is however perceived that way by some Christians.

I think you're right on both counts. Dawkins speaks directly and clearly and does not apologize for his views. That is not necessarily antagonistic.

The fact that he will not pander to religious ideas and grant them immunity from examination is why religious people think he's aggressive and antagonistic. They don't like being having their privileged position – which they view as normative and "the way things should be" – challenged. They're not used to having to justify themselves in terms that actually make sense in other-than-religious or other-than-cowed-by-the-religious contexts.

Moreover, there are some subsets of Christians that need to feel persecuted and need scapegoats to blame for their troubles. Fewer people coming to your church? Blame it on those damned atheists enticing our kids away from God…..