Letters to the Editor
-
And those reasons are....
"[Trust in science is] a deep faith commitment because there's no way you can set up a series of scientific experiments to prove that science is the only reliable guide to truth."
Is Haught just spewing every tired anti-atheist argument he can think of in the hopes that something will stick? I've never heard a scientist say that the scientific method (and it is simply a method) is the only way to arrive at the truth of a proposition. It is, however, the only reliable way we have at our disposal, the ghost who never lies being unavailable. The reader will notice that Haught conspicuously neglects to say what other methods he uses to evaluate whether a fact is true or not. We spent the majority of human history going with our gut, and insisting that "we just know." The staggering frequency with which these other methods fail is reason enough not to trust them.
That god of the gaps crap he pulls when asked about neuroscience was pretty pathetic, too.
-
I hope you believe in unicorns, Steve
because there is absolutely no evidence to prove that they do not exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
-
A tree, Jason, and the moral supremacy of a dog vs. god
I find more religious joy in the sight of a tree, the shade of it, the life in it, than in the mad killer god and zombie torture victim/future flame torturer of billions that Christians seem to find so comforting.
A tree is real. The "god" he worships is fear of a psychotic father manifested, Jason, Freddy Krueger, a nightmarish, completely unpredictable and unkillable child killer. The god so many fear is like nothing else but a demon; if the god they quake before were held to the same moral measure as say, a dog, we'd have to shoot it. But no dog would act like a god does. Dogs have standards.
I feel no need to defend a lack of belief in a such a morally repulsive creation. Men have never created a god morally superior to themselves.
-
Um Steve Kelner PhD?
"Finally, as regards atheists living in nonbelief, there's no scientific support for God as such, but there's no scientific evidence against him, either, "
Finally as regards to non-Superman believers living in non-belief of Superman, there is no scientific support for Superman as such but there is no scientific evidence against him, either.
Where did you get your degree anyway?
-
The author condescendingly falls into the same hypocrisy as all other atheist bashers.
John Haught so arrogantly states that 'nihilism' is the implication of 'total rejection' of God (I suppose an anthropomorphic one that has a white beard and cares about our fate and actions) and goes on to say, breathlessly:
"But we need a worldview that is capable of justifying the confidence that we place in our minds, in truth, in goodness, in beauty. I argue that an atheistic worldview is not capable of justifying that confidence."
He states that the 'new atheists' are not as refined as the old, but implies that the old atheists were too scared not to believe in God anyway.
I urge him to read Bertrand Russell's essay "A Free Man's Worship". Here is a small sample:
"In the spectacle of Death, in the endurance of intolerable pain, and in the irrevocableness of a vanished past, there is a sacredness, an overpowering awe, a feeling of the vastness, the depth, the inexhaustible mystery of existence, in which, as by some strange marriage of pain, the sufferer is bound to the world by bonds of sorrow.....Victory, in this struggle with the powers of darkness, is the true baptism into the glorious company of heroes, the true initiation into the overmastering beauty of human existence."
Which I agree with wholeheartedly.
Please don't lecture me about how atheists have no hopes, desires, appreciation of wonderment, of beauty, of hope. That is your problem.
-
Carl Said It Best...
"In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded; "This is better than we thought! The universe is much bigger than our prophets said - grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed"? Instead they say, "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way!" A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge." ~Carl Sagan
All the arguing back and forth is still within the context of that pernicious old bastard Yahweh...and Muslims can protest all they want; Allah IS Yahweh, aka The Lord. Until the discussion moves beyond the paradigm of a Bronze Age Desert Nomad God, it will all be so much wank.
-
Mr.Paulson is absolutely right
and most of these letters prove it. Many of the new pop atheists and obviously most of these letter writers are woefully ignorant of religion. I would be more impressed if some of these letter writers were capable of actually writing something thought provoking...but they can't, because quite frankly they are uneducated reactionaries. To consider yourself educated and I don't mean that you have a degree from some cow state college diploma mill, I mean really educated in the classical sense, you ought to be able to discuss religion with some understanding and knowledge and none of you can do it. I went to a Jesuit University and questions such as those raised by Mr.Paulson were an integral part of my curriculum and I cringe when I read such willfully ignorant rants. Being well versed in theology and religion should be part of any liberal arts education...for atheists and believers alike.
-
@Steve Kelner
I'm an atheist, and I would never argue that faith does not exists. I'd go on to say that having faith that the Earth will keep spinning and you'll see the Sun on your eastern horizon in the morning has some historic precedence. God existing, not so much. Therefore, one belief is justified, the other, not so much. However, faith definitely exists, problematic or practical as it may be depending on context.
Also, the best an atheist can say about the existence of God is not that such an entity is unnecessary (though that is also true). More importantly, I don't even have to consider the supernatural in my view of the world. Religious beliefs require a supernatural element be added to the equation. That's why religious beliefs are unjustified and atheistic views are reasonable.