Print
What do these atheists understand of religion?
by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
Reposted from:
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/yasmin_alibhai_brown/
article2921855.ece
On Sunday, I was on the last ever Heaven and Earth show on the BBC which, for nine years has been a gentle dale in the noisy world of modern television pleasurable, tranquil, receptive, candid and at times profoundly revealing of the place of religion in today's world.
Not a programme for the rowdy and brash God bashers, obviously, in particular Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, who really are perilously close to losing their flawlessly rational heads as they fulminate like demented fire-and-brimstone preachers. Such men know it all, they don't listen, and presume to judge people they won't ever understand.
Radio 4's John Humphrys has taken on the fanatic atheists in a new book about faith and the human urge to believe. Some aspects of our nature are not susceptible to scientific enquiry, cannot be dissected, categorised and validated in terms that would satisfy the "rational" disbelievers, whose intellect is colossal but imagination puny.
There are no experiments and tests to explain love, empathy, longing, the agony and ecstasy of the heart, the wild and wonderful creativity of the brain, that thing that happens to you when a full moon appears above the sea and is reflected in it. Sorry, but knowing the science of why the moon shines is irrelevant to the experience. Faith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality, both making you tremblingly conscious of forces vast and beyond words. Impertinent scientists cannot know what they speak of.
I agree with Dawkins, the quieter A C Grayling, and with humanists that religion can and does disable human aspiration and will; it can and does lead worshippers of various go s to a violent hatred of "outsiders"; it can and does debase women; it can and does create a religious autocracy; it can and does encourage appalling behaviour.
Since 9/11 Islam, Judaism and Christianity have become dangerously politicised. Too many people today have developed an intensified religious identity. I also believe strongly that public spaces and institutions should be wholly secular. An established church, state-funded faith schools and increasing encroachment of religion into politics are bad for us all. Sixty years ago, the inspirational leaders of liberated India established a secular constitution without which the country would have been ripped apart by its many competing, received religions. The gods had to keep to their place in free India, but they remain vital to individuals and communities.
Having faith makes me humble and self-questioning, unlike the unbelievers who know they are always right. As Humphrys writes: "I have fallen into the habit of asking almost everyone I meet if they believe in God. And here is an interesting thing: it was only the atheists who seemed absolutely certain."
To these zealots, believers are mostly naive or stupid. We are also inflammable, easily led, malevolent, sadomasochistic and a threat to the future of the planet. In his book The God Delusion, Dawkins proclaims that faith instruction to the young is worse than paedophile abuse. John Cornwell, the Cambridge ethicist who has just penned an elegant riposte to the Dawkins' rant, points out that this was the imagery used by Nazis too, for whom their country was a healthy body invaded by multiplying, Jewish bacilli.
The hysterical imagery is objectionable. But much worse is the dishonesty. Militant atheists have never accepted that evil comes out of their camp as well as ours, and good does too. Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao were driven to genocide not by religion but cold, cruel power. None of these men feared God.
The churches kept alive resistance to dictatorships in South American republics at the worst of times; Apartheid used Christianity to justify racism, but formidable opposition came from within the church; Gandhi and Martin Luther King found strength to fight for what was right through God; faith gives Muslims hope in many of the most hopeless of states, and for millions across the globe it may be the only defence against the spread of gross and dehumanising materialism. Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's Cathedral and the works of Michelangelo.
Fundamentalist atheists want to replace old religions with their own. To them all previous prophets were false. Their fervour makes them as blind and uncompromising as those following the religions they detest. Science gave them no immunity they too are infected by the virus of faith. Only, they would say, theirs is the only true path, and all other roads lead to damnation. Of course.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/yasmin_alibhai_brown/
article2921855.ece
On Sunday, I was on the last ever Heaven and Earth show on the BBC which, for nine years has been a gentle dale in the noisy world of modern television pleasurable, tranquil, receptive, candid and at times profoundly revealing of the place of religion in today's world.
Not a programme for the rowdy and brash God bashers, obviously, in particular Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, who really are perilously close to losing their flawlessly rational heads as they fulminate like demented fire-and-brimstone preachers. Such men know it all, they don't listen, and presume to judge people they won't ever understand.
Radio 4's John Humphrys has taken on the fanatic atheists in a new book about faith and the human urge to believe. Some aspects of our nature are not susceptible to scientific enquiry, cannot be dissected, categorised and validated in terms that would satisfy the "rational" disbelievers, whose intellect is colossal but imagination puny.
There are no experiments and tests to explain love, empathy, longing, the agony and ecstasy of the heart, the wild and wonderful creativity of the brain, that thing that happens to you when a full moon appears above the sea and is reflected in it. Sorry, but knowing the science of why the moon shines is irrelevant to the experience. Faith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality, both making you tremblingly conscious of forces vast and beyond words. Impertinent scientists cannot know what they speak of.
I agree with Dawkins, the quieter A C Grayling, and with humanists that religion can and does disable human aspiration and will; it can and does lead worshippers of various go s to a violent hatred of "outsiders"; it can and does debase women; it can and does create a religious autocracy; it can and does encourage appalling behaviour.
Since 9/11 Islam, Judaism and Christianity have become dangerously politicised. Too many people today have developed an intensified religious identity. I also believe strongly that public spaces and institutions should be wholly secular. An established church, state-funded faith schools and increasing encroachment of religion into politics are bad for us all. Sixty years ago, the inspirational leaders of liberated India established a secular constitution without which the country would have been ripped apart by its many competing, received religions. The gods had to keep to their place in free India, but they remain vital to individuals and communities.
Having faith makes me humble and self-questioning, unlike the unbelievers who know they are always right. As Humphrys writes: "I have fallen into the habit of asking almost everyone I meet if they believe in God. And here is an interesting thing: it was only the atheists who seemed absolutely certain."
To these zealots, believers are mostly naive or stupid. We are also inflammable, easily led, malevolent, sadomasochistic and a threat to the future of the planet. In his book The God Delusion, Dawkins proclaims that faith instruction to the young is worse than paedophile abuse. John Cornwell, the Cambridge ethicist who has just penned an elegant riposte to the Dawkins' rant, points out that this was the imagery used by Nazis too, for whom their country was a healthy body invaded by multiplying, Jewish bacilli.
The hysterical imagery is objectionable. But much worse is the dishonesty. Militant atheists have never accepted that evil comes out of their camp as well as ours, and good does too. Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao were driven to genocide not by religion but cold, cruel power. None of these men feared God.
The churches kept alive resistance to dictatorships in South American republics at the worst of times; Apartheid used Christianity to justify racism, but formidable opposition came from within the church; Gandhi and Martin Luther King found strength to fight for what was right through God; faith gives Muslims hope in many of the most hopeless of states, and for millions across the globe it may be the only defence against the spread of gross and dehumanising materialism. Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's Cathedral and the works of Michelangelo.
Fundamentalist atheists want to replace old religions with their own. To them all previous prophets were false. Their fervour makes them as blind and uncompromising as those following the religions they detest. Science gave them no immunity they too are infected by the virus of faith. Only, they would say, theirs is the only true path, and all other roads lead to damnation. Of course.
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Monday, September 3, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 50 of 111 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #67257 by mmurray on September 3, 2007 at 1:35 am
Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's Cathedral and the works of Michelangelo.
Antibiotics, quantum mechanics, general relativity, Mars rovers, Apollo spacecraft, 747, Hubble telescope, lower infant mortality, longer life. Why can't these people see the awesome creations they are surrounded by ? I'd trade the fact that I can be confident that my children will get to adulthood alive and well for all the God inspired achitectural stuff above.
Michael
Other Comments by mmurray
3. Comment #67259 by irate_atheist on September 3, 2007 at 1:37 am
"...believers are mostly naive or stupid. We are also inflammable, easily led, malevolent, sadomasochistic and a threat to the future of the planet."Oh - Yasmin - you forgot to add 'wilfully ignorant'.
Other Comments by irate_atheist
4. Comment #67260 by roach on September 3, 2007 at 1:38 am
Terrible and bipolar article. More atheism is another religion and atheists are dogmatic nonsense. Yet the author admits that religion "can and does" create all types of problems. Then why not openly oppose these ideas?Also, this idea that atheists have "puny" imaginations is absurd. I'm free to imagine anything I want. But I'm not free to believe anything I can dream.
Other Comments by roach
5. Comment #67262 by mmurray on September 3, 2007 at 1:38 am
Some aspects of our nature are not susceptible to scientific enquiry, cannot be dissected, categorised and validated in terms that would satisfy the "rational" disbelievers, whose intellect is colossal but imagination puny.
These people are so arrogant. Have they any idea how much imagination you need to invent a radical new scientific theory. No they just want to gaze at their navels and feel all warm and fuzzy.
Michael
Other Comments by mmurray
6. Comment #67264 by Philip1978 on September 3, 2007 at 1:42 am
Wow, what an article!"elegant riposte" from Cornwell?
Professor Dawkins, from what I have read of your replies on another thread concerning John Cornwall, oops, sorry, Cornwell, I get the feeling you were not elegantly riposted enough!! Plus I have yet to see you rant properly in full fundamentalist style to finally win me over to your religion and One True Path!!
This article is preposterous and full of abysmal arguments ranging from militancy to the "look at how Stalin acted and he didn't believe in god" rantings. If only the author would see it is the God Quetz they should be following, not some fictitious invisible IT who inspires people to paint ceilings!
Oh well, more Tea I think,
Philip Priestley
Other Comments by Philip1978
7. Comment #67266 by Quetzalcoatl on September 3, 2007 at 1:51 am
Faith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality, both making you tremblingly conscious of forces vast and beyond words. Impertinent scientists cannot know what they speak of.
But obviously she does, and she phrases it so well, managing to use so many big words to say very little.
Having faith makes me humble and self-questioning
Yeah, her humility REALLY comes across in this article.
and for millions across the globe it may be the only defence against the spread of gross and dehumanising materialism
And just what is "gross and dehumanising materialism" when it's at home? Another trite phrase trotted out that means very little.
Only, they would say, theirs is the only true path, and all other roads lead to damnation. Of course.
Notice she didn't produce a single quote to back that slanderous assertion up. Of course.
EDIT-
Philip1978- if only, if only. One day they will see.
Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl
8. Comment #67269 by atheist_peace on September 3, 2007 at 1:57 am
"Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's Cathedral and the works of Michelangelo."The Pyramids were inspired by God (The god of Abraham)? I don't think so.
Why does the author choose mostly religious buildings as the greatest creations of man? How about Literature, Music, Poetry, Film, Science, Art, the internet, space travel, etc etc?
What proof is there that Michelangelo's work was inspired by god? Just because he was hired by relgionists doesn't mean he was inspired by their beliefs. In his time it was probably impossible for an artist to make a living without religious content.
Other Comments by atheist_peace
9. Comment #67273 by Eamonn Shute on September 3, 2007 at 2:11 am
I am glad to see that The Heaven And Earth Show has finished. Recently they had an item about "fake" psychics, so they had a "genuine" psychic to criticise them! My only worry is about what they put in its place; it can't be any worse - or can it? Other Comments by Eamonn Shute
10. Comment #67274 by Jiten on September 3, 2007 at 2:13 am
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is so so ignorant that I wonder if they feel no shame in letting the whole world know just how ignorant they are by writing and publishing this stuff?Has anyone else also noticed how this type of article is always written by the scientifically illiterate?
Other Comments by Jiten
11. Comment #67277 by steve99 on September 3, 2007 at 2:21 am
I am rather shocked by this. I had a lot of respect for Alibhai-Brown, but no longer. Other Comments by steve99
12. Comment #67278 by Peacebeuponme on September 3, 2007 at 2:22 am
Continuously astounded by the mischaracterisations. This woman has clearly not read Dawkins.There are no experiments and tests to explain love, empathy, longing, the agony and ecstasy of the heart, the wild and wonderful creativity of the brain, that thing that happens to you when a full moon appears above the sea and is reflected in it. Sorry, but knowing the science of why the moon shines is irrelevant to the experience. Faith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality, both making you tremblingly conscious of forces vast and beyond words. Impertinent scientists cannot know what they speak of.I think most of us would agree with the sentiment of second sentence above, and have no problem saying so. Knowing why something happens doesn't diminish the exprience of it (although for Bertrand Russell, it actually enhanced it). We just don't need to call the experience "god".
Having faith makes me humble and self-questioningArgument has been answered a million times before.
All these doubting believers - Are they torn between their own brand and atheism only, or does Hasidic Judaism or the Teapot concern them?
Other Comments by Peacebeuponme
13. Comment #67279 by Richard Morgan on September 3, 2007 at 2:27 am
Science gave them no immunity they too are infected by the virus of faith. Only, they (atheists) would say, theirs is the only true path, and all other roads lead to damnation. Of course.So atheists would talk about damnation. Would they? Only a pompous little prat could presume what I would say,and as an atheist I would not talk about damnation.
That kind of presumptuousness makes me damned annoyed!
Oops...
Other Comments by Richard Morgan
14. Comment #67280 by atp on September 3, 2007 at 2:27 am
This article was mostly a homage to the God of gaps. There are still som unanswered questions out there, so lets fill them up with God.«Having faith makes me humble and self-questioning, unlike the unbelievers who know they are always right.»
Who knows they are always right? The religious people who claims there is a god? Or the atheist people do not believe in any given explanaition for what thy don't know?
I don't know where our universe came from. I don't understand where the quality of our senses are coming from. Concluding with God would be a jump to a conclusion that does not have support in any knowledge or evidence. So I don't conclude with anything. That makes me an atheist.
Other Comments by atp
15. Comment #67287 by gcdavis on September 3, 2007 at 2:48 am
What do these atheists understand of religion?Nothing and Everything!
Nothing: because faith in the supernatural is infantile and does not warrant further examination
Everything: for the same reason as Nothing.
Other Comments by gcdavis
16. Comment #67290 by Series of Tubes on September 3, 2007 at 2:53 am
Is this a parody? It reads like something from one of The Onion's pseudo-columnists.Other Comments by Series of Tubes
17. Comment #67293 by icanus on September 3, 2007 at 2:56 am
Some aspects of our nature are not susceptible to scientific enquiry, cannot be dissected, categorised and validated in terms that would satisfy the "rational" disbelievers, whose intellect is colossal but imagination puny.
Substitute "cannot be" for "have not yet been" and we might have the start of a journey of discovery rather than the abrupt derailment of one.
Not too many centuries ago, our propensity to die in our early twenties of all sorts of nasty diseases was one such aspect of our nature that "could not be dissected, categorised and validated". Fortunately for all of us, some people weren't happy to call all a mystery and leave it at that - as a result we now have medicine.
that thing that happens to you when a full moon appears above the sea and is reflected in it. Sorry, but knowing the science of why the moon shines is irrelevant to the experience.
It's irrelevant to the experience if you want it to be, and are happy just gawping at shiny objects.
There are many awe inspiring and beautiful sights in nature, but understanding how and why they appear as they do has always (in my own experience) enhanced the experience rather than detracting from it.
faith gives Muslims hope in many of the most hopeless of states
I think this must be a typo. Fixed version below:
millions of muslims are gulled into tolerating lives of grinding poverty and cruelty under the most dreadful dictatorial regimes simply because the ruling classes couch their oppression in the language of 'faith'
Other Comments by icanus
18. Comment #67294 by eric.malitz on September 3, 2007 at 2:58 am
Who cares if certain structures were religious-built..just like it doesnt matter that Martin Luther King was a believing christian, it lends no creedence to religious faith as a virtue to be held above reason. Pagans built lots of amazing things, so did 'divinely inspired' abrahamic followers. Led Zeppelin wrote songs about battles, wizards and drug busts but it certainly has no bearing on our appreciation of the music outside of aesthetic value. Some of the most amazing modern structures I've seen personally are of Hindu extraction..but so what?Other Comments by eric.malitz
19. Comment #67298 by Duff on September 3, 2007 at 3:06 am
Is "humble and self questioning" the same thing as "embarrassed and ignorant"?Other Comments by Duff
20. Comment #67300 by Russell Blackford on September 3, 2007 at 3:12 am
This bit is pretty good, though I have some problems with the last sentence ...
Since 9/11 Islam, Judaism and Christianity have become dangerously politicised. Too many people today have developed an intensified religious identity. I also believe strongly that public spaces and institutions should be wholly secular.
An established church, state-funded faith schools and increasing encroachment of religion into politics are bad for us all. Sixty years ago, the inspirational leaders of liberated India established a secular constitution without which the country would have been ripped apart by its many competing, received religions. The gods had to keep to their place in free India, but they remain vital to individuals and communities.
The last sentence is rather pollyanna-ish, alas. Still, why couldn't she have written just that one para? Sometimes, less is more.
Other Comments by Russell Blackford
21. Comment #67301 by BAEOZ on September 3, 2007 at 3:12 am
And here is an interesting thing: it was only the atheists who seemed absolutely certain."
It's funny, I'd have thought saying that we await any evidence of god, and that evidence explanatory value for the god case only, we think it dishonest to believe in god is the opposite of an absolute statement about god's nonexistence. Silly me.
Who are these fundamental atheists by the way?
Other Comments by BAEOZ
22. Comment #67302 by steveroot on September 3, 2007 at 3:13 am
Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's Cathedral and the works of Michelangelo.
Missing a punctuation mark, my man? ;-)
We forgot a few: the Parthenon in Athens, the Baha'i Temple in Wilmette, Illinois, and others too numerous to mention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_architecture
And that's just architecture.
But... which god(s) are they inspired by?
Steve
Other Comments by steveroot
23. Comment #67303 by Silmarien on September 3, 2007 at 3:16 am
I think the biggest mistake Yasmin Alibhai-Brown makes with this article is thinking that atheists know nothing about religion. But most atheists have come *from* religion after realising it was a load of old tosh. We've experienced religion and rejected it.Other Comments by Silmarien
24. Comment #67304 by Corylus on September 3, 2007 at 3:19 am
She's just peeved because her favourite telly programme got axed!On Sunday, I was on the last ever Heaven and Earth show on the BBC which, for nine years has been a gentle dale in the noisy world of modern television pleasurable, tranquil, receptive, candid and at times profoundly revealing of the place of religion in today's world.
I sympathetise. I was gutted when Angel finished and don't even get me started on Serenity.
Just paint 'geek' my forhead :P
Other Comments by Corylus
25. Comment #67305 by pewkatchoo on September 3, 2007 at 3:21 am
Heaven and Earth finished. What a pity, I loved it. It was my humour fix for Sunday mornings. Then watching Songs of Praise in the evening. What a lark watching all those rapturous faces singing praises to him/her on high. I used to put the text on just to see the words being displayed next to the lovely faces. Laugh, I almost started. Other Comments by pewkatchoo
26. Comment #67310 by AdrianB on September 3, 2007 at 3:28 am
Silmarien, you just beat me to it with your comment.What do these atheists understand of religion?
If the answer for me personally is "not a lot" then what about the years when I was a confirmed, church 8 times a week, blood and body of Jesus, godparent, Christian? Then surely it must have been "not a lot" as well?
Other Comments by AdrianB
27. Comment #67313 by scooternyc on September 3, 2007 at 3:29 am
"Having faith makes me humble..."The author is the antithesis of the statement by the very nature of the writing; such a fraud.
"unlike the unbelievers who know they are always right"
Always the implicit victimization statements made of persecution for nonsensical beliefs, as if the authors "beliefs" are to be given any particular respect for just having them.
"and a threat to the future of the planet"
Indeed, this is true as fundamentalists continue to demand political power and through the court system, the slow easing of restraints demanded upon and if acquiesced, will be the very same door openings that islam is looking for to make its way into the culture, to scream discrimination, etc.
The christians think that if they can get their democracies into theocracies in time they can wage war and battle on islam, not understanding that the better strategy for ALL people is to slap down the rabid unsocialized dog that is islamic jihad.
And who is the more arrogant?
At least my action is based on the innate humanity for all of mankind and not the feigned piousness rooted in bigotry and discrimination with the belief of jesus returning for Armageddon.
Yasmin, you're correct when you think that someone like me perceives you as an idiot, indeed, I most certainly do.
Other Comments by scooternyc
28. Comment #67315 by Dimitar on September 3, 2007 at 3:41 am
A Minor point for Steveroot,The Parthenon was a Bank (ok, a treasury, but it sounds better). Its inspiration was primarily money, and the defeat of the Persians. Presumably Yasmin Whatsherface did not mention this structure because it stemmed from a 'dehumanising materialist' motive?
PS Did Dawkins really say religion was worse than paedophilia? I thought he said it was a form of child abuse. I've read this twice now in separate articles but with no supporting quotes. I assume there'll be a retraction; otherwise, if it were me, I'd sue.
Other Comments by Dimitar
29. Comment #67324 by Theocrapcy on September 3, 2007 at 4:08 am
So the answer against atheism is to misrepresent it in the same way she claims it is misrepresenting religion?Who allows these morons anywhere near a keyboard?
Other Comments by Theocrapcy
30. Comment #67327 by Eamonn Shute on September 3, 2007 at 4:17 am
pewkatchoo: "Laugh, I almost started."Perhaps this will get you going!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-ZnPE3G_YY
Other Comments by Eamonn Shute
31. Comment #67328 by steve99 on September 3, 2007 at 4:25 am
Who allows these morons anywhere near a keyboard?
What is so depressing is that Alibhai-Brown is certainly not a moron. She is a respected commenter on things religious and political.
Perhaps Richard Dawkins needs to write a new book: "A Response to What Everyone Who Has Not Actually Read 'The God Delusion' Thinks It Says"
Other Comments by steve99
32. Comment #67330 by wandapec on September 3, 2007 at 4:29 am
Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's Cathedral and the works of Michelangelo.
It's amazing how you can waste your time and skills when you have such a limited knowledge and understanding of the world!
Other Comments by wandapec
33. Comment #67333 by jonecc on September 3, 2007 at 4:38 am
We can pick apart the arguments, and you all have. What really bugs me about this kind of thing is the arrogant claim to a richer inner life. They say things likeFaith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality, both making you tremblingly conscious of forces vast and beyond words. Impertinent scientists cannot know what they speak of.
as if it was entirely clear that their experience of looking at moon and sea is automatically deeper and more meaningful than ours. They accuse us of arrogance, but we don't assert anything about their internal states of mind that we can't demonstrate.
Other Comments by jonecc
34. Comment #67335 by Yorker on September 3, 2007 at 4:43 am
The degree of crap blethered here makes it difficult to decide what to say, so I'll choose just one point."...faith gives Muslims hope in many of the most hopeless of states, and for millions across the globe it may be the only defence against the spread of gross and dehumanising materialism."
My dear Yasmin, you have failed to notice that faith is a major CAUSE of the spread of gross and dehumanising materialism. Look at the number of evangelistic millionaires around that use faith to fleece the faithful! I think you're simply one of those whose love of belief blinds them to the sometimes harsh but true nature of reality.
Other Comments by Yorker
35. Comment #67337 by Gewoonfred on September 3, 2007 at 4:44 am
....me, i get so tired whenever i read these "look at the nazi's, stalin, pol pot etc." arguments.
Christians (e.g.) did horrible things because/in the name of their beliefs.
Atheists did horrible things for lots of other reasons (i can think of a few), but the only real reason is the fact that they were non-believers?
That really depresses me.
Other Comments by Gewoonfred
36. Comment #67338 by steve99 on September 3, 2007 at 4:45 am
Faith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality, both making you tremblingly conscious of forces vast and beyond words. Impertinent scientists cannot know what they speak of.
This is sad. It seems she has read, or seen, or taken in, nothing of what Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins or Jonathan Miller have written or presented about the incredible wonder of the universe. As Hitchens puts it... if you want to feel real wonder and awe, just think about cosmic forces beyond anything we can being to imagine, like the event horizon of a black hole.
Other Comments by steve99
37. Comment #67339 by AdrianB on September 3, 2007 at 4:46 am
Of the most awesome creations made my man, most were inspired by God the pyramids, the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, the temples of India, St Paul's CathedralOf course these, and many other, great monuments to religious power were built using slave labour, when the respect for life was very low. Religious wealth would have been much better spent in other more positive ways than advertising.
Other Comments by AdrianB
38. Comment #67340 by Crazymalc on September 3, 2007 at 4:55 am
This galneeds to read "Unweaving the Rainbow". In that book Prof. Dawkins makes the point that understaning the beauty of a rainbow (or a moon in water) only adds to the awe, it does not diminish it. We can enjoy the beauty of the rainbow in and of itseld. And we can understand the beauty of the science when we explain it.Understanding the science only adds to the beauty.
And she needs to read the books he is quoting as well. Dawkins does not claim that the labeling of babies as Christian etc. is worse than paedophilia.
"It was only the atheists who seemed absolutely certain."
Only certain given the current evidence. Bring me some evidence and I will change my mind.
This stands in stark contrast to faith, which will not change its mind given any evidence.
Remember what Sam Harris said:
Ask yourself, when even the doubts of experts are thought to confirm a doctrine, what could possibly disconfirm it?
Ack, the more I read of this article the worse it becomes:
"The hysterical imagery is objectionable. But much worse is the dishonesty. Militant atheists have never accepted that evil comes out of their camp as well as ours, and good does too. Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao were driven to genocide not by religion but cold, cruel power. None of these men feared God."
She says that "...evil comes out of [The Athiest's] camp..." and then says their motives were "..cold cruel power". That just plain old doesn't make sense. How was their Atheism a motive? You may as well blame on their moustaches with this sort of arguing.
"Fundamentalist atheists want to replace old religions with their own"
Nope. I'm with John Lennon. NO religion is a good thing
Other Comments by Crazymalc
39. Comment #67344 by Yorker on September 3, 2007 at 4:59 am
2. Comment #67256 by cyris8400 I agree.
Although the fact of Hitler's Muslim legions that numbered tens of thousands is well documented, nobody ever seems to mention it! These legions were affiliated to the SS and employed in the massacre thousands of Jews. Hitler stated that religious people made the best soldiers and Muslims in particular because of their fanaticism.
Other Comments by Yorker
40. Comment #67352 by Ford Prefect on September 3, 2007 at 5:24 am
I started writing a letter to the Independent when there was just one comment here. So expect others have expressed the same opinion as me but more eloquently. However for what its worth, here's my letter:I am writing to comment on Yasmin Aliibhai-Brown hypocrisy and use of inappropriate pejorative language in her piece 'What do atheists understand of religion'
It does not help her argument to describe atheists as either militant or fundamentalist. Is she confusing these terms with passion? If so, could I not fairly describe her as a militant moderate and John Humphreys as a fundamentalist agnostic?
If Dawkins book is a rant, Alibhai-Brown's piece is hysterical blather.
She claims that men such as Dawkins and Hitchens 'know it all'. Yet in the same article she 'knows' that there are no experiments and tests to explain love etc. and that their are aspects of our nature that are not susceptible to scientific enquiry. She also 'knows' that these people have puny imaginations. Pots and kettles come to mind.
Alibhai-Brown accuses atheists of dishonesty when she drags out, yet again, the strawmen of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao. Has she honestly not heard the many rebuttals to this argument before? Suffice to say 'Good people do good things, bad people do bad things. But it takes religion for good people to do bad things '.
She points out that the church was on both sides of the apartheid argument. The same is true of slavery many years before. Does she not accept that it would have been better if the proponents of slavery and apartheid didn't have the authority of scripture to support their wickedness? Is she sure it takes religion for people to be altuistic?
If all relgion did was cause the erection of great buildings, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Alibhai-Brown accepts that the encroachment of religion is a bad thing. Yet in some countries it is not so much encroaching as embedded. Religionists are homophobic, misogonist and in positions of power. They demand that I agree with them or at the least I will burn in hell for eternity. Some also wish to hasten my passage there.
To paraphrase religionists, Alibhai desciption of atheism is not one I recognise. Atheists I know don't want to replace religion with anything. They just want to stop it interfering in our lives. Atheists I know are not certain that a supernatural force does not exist. They are certainly inclined to disbelief because of lack of evidence. So please ask Miss Alibhai-Brown in her next well thought out column to provide proof of her particular deity and all the militant, fundamenatlist atheists will disappear as if by magic.
Other Comments by Ford Prefect
41. Comment #67354 by wolf mechanics on September 3, 2007 at 5:39 am
Faith is the light of the moon above and that light in the sea, reality and spirituality
Tripe, anyone?
Clearly faith IS a disease, and it attacks Wernicke's area.
Other Comments by wolf mechanics
42. Comment #67357 by aodh on September 3, 2007 at 5:44 am
"Militant atheists have never accepted that evil comes out of their camp as well as ours " Where did she get that from? I don't think you'll find an atheist anywhere who won't admit that non-believers are incapable of doing evil deeds just like believers as both are also capable of doing good. We are talking here about survival enhancing actions towards your fellow man. In some religions one of the worst things you can do is not believe in god even worse than killing; and a lot of the good that believers did was not in any of their manuals."Only, they would say, theirs is the only true path, and all other roads lead to damnation. " This misses the point. It's not about blind faith. We have brains to think with. I don't know about you but I'm pretty sure that you won't get into Valhalla if you die in battle although no-one's ever actually proven that.
Other Comments by aodh
43. Comment #67362 by The Flying Trilobite on September 3, 2007 at 6:02 am
As AdrianB pointed out, the pyramids were built on slave labour. Hardly being inspiring, they are monuments of great oppressive evil. The pyramids were built to last, and they were built not in deference to the Biblical God, nor even to Horus or Osiris. They were built to house the "god-kings", ruler of the slaves building them. Religions were certainly one type of building block of modern civilisation. They are also pulling back the curtain in how rulers use religion to control the masses.
Unless you think the Atlanteans built them using telekinesis. Then they are just pretty.
The Flying Trilobite
http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com
Other Comments by The Flying Trilobite
44. Comment #67363 by Robert Maynard on September 3, 2007 at 6:02 am
Good Gravy - what a pile of puke.."There are no experiments and tests to explain love, empathy, longing, the agony and ecstasy of the heart, the wild and wonderful creativity of the brain, that thing that happens to you when a full moon appears above the sea and is reflected in it. Sorry, but knowing the science of why the moon shines is irrelevant to the experience."I should try to resist mean-spirited jabs at fellow site-posters, particularly when such insightful explorations of incoherence are being penned by notable authors, but it sounds like sirs Bonzai and stag would get along swell with Mrs Alibhai Brown.
Other Comments by Robert Maynard
45. Comment #67365 by stephenray on September 3, 2007 at 6:09 am
Of course, believers criticise atheists for being certain, just before they boast of having doubts. Well woopee-doo.There are probably some atheists who have doubts. But isn't the proper view like this:
The reason one doubts something is that the proposition is unlikely.
There's nothing unlikely about the atheist position - 'no supernatural beings, full stop'.
There are a million unlikelinesses in religious belief, however. Where's the credit in doubting something that doubtful?
Where's the fault in being cheerfully convinced of the propositions of atheism, and not doubting it at all?
Other Comments by stephenray
46. Comment #67366 by chezzyd on September 3, 2007 at 6:14 am
I don't know why these people feel so threatened by what is no more than a dissenting opinion expressing scepticism at a belief about the way the world works. What's the problem?RD has expressed many times he has no beef with nice, kindly, peaceful religious types who don't try to push creationism in schools, block stem cell research, deny equal rights to gays or blow themselves up. He has also made it clear that he has some affinity with the Einsteinian, pantheistic view of religion. So where do religious people get off telling us that WE are dogmatic and fundamentalist? Where do they get off putting words in Dawkins mouth? Or thinking that they have a monopoly on 'spirituality' and feelings of awe and wonder?
The arrogance and stupidity of this article is beyond me - she obviously has not read Dawkins' book yet feels qualified to not only misrepresent it but to put words in all our mouths. Astonishing. And this is a so-called religious MODERATE!!!!
Other Comments by chezzyd
47. Comment #67370 by oxytocin on September 3, 2007 at 6:22 am
I really despise it when ridiculous articles like this are posted on a particular site and then the reader isn't permitted to comment on them. It feels like this writer is getting away with murder. Other Comments by oxytocin
48. Comment #67371 by CDG1 on September 3, 2007 at 6:25 am
I think the author gets it about right here with this sentence:"Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao were driven to genocide not by religion but cold, cruel power."
It is true the actions they took were to build up and then preserve power for themselves. And they accomplished their goals (to some degree) not because of Atheism but in spite of it. As Richard Dawkins has said in the past, their Atheism had as much to do with their atrocities as did the fact that they had mustaches (he was referring to stalin and hitler only)
But instead of letting the above sentence stand on its own (which would have been fine) he adds this manipulative and deceiptful sentence:
"None of these men feared God."
As if that has ever stopped anyone from murder, rape, genital mutilation, genoicide, sacrifice etc...In fact, for the very God fearing these things are done because they know the mind of God and it is his will that they strap on a bomb and walk into a school.
Other Comments by CDG1
49. Comment #67373 by Serious on September 3, 2007 at 6:35 am
"rowdy and brash God bashers, obviously, in particular Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, who really are perilously close to losing their flawlessly rational heads as they fulminate like demented fire-and-brimstone preachers. Such men know it all, they don't listen, and presume to judge people they won't ever understand"Simple slander and character assignation.
That article was merely an appeal to emotion and prejudice. Sadly, that often works.
Other Comments by Serious
50. Comment #67375 by debaser71 on September 3, 2007 at 6:40 am
Another terrible article but more promotion for us atheists. I'm glad when these religionists keep the discussion going because conversation favors those with reality on their side.Other Comments by debaser71
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Links:
Quotes of Note:
"Thus the creationist's favourite question "What is the use of half an eye?" Actually, this is a lightweight question, a doddle to answer. Half an eye is just 1 per cent better than 49 per cent of an eye..."
Richard Dawkins
"We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart"
H.L. Mencken
"There was no place in the land where the seeker could not find some small budding sign of pity for the slave. No place in all the land but one-- the pulpit. It yielded last; it always does. It fought a strong and stubborn fight, and then did what it always does, joined the procession-- at the tail end. Slavery fell. The slavery texts in the Bible remained; the practice changed; that was all."
Mark Twain
"Secularists are often wrongly accused of trying to purge religious ideals from public discourse. We simply want to deny them public sponsorship."
Wendy Kaminer
"I don't want to sound callous. I mean, even if I have nothing to offer, that doesn't matter, because that still doesn't mean that what anybody else has to offer therefore has to be true."
Richard Dawkins
Other Recommended Reading
Conciousness Explained
Daniel C. Dennett
The Blank Slate
Steven Pinker
Freedom Evolves
Daniel C. Dennett
On The Origin of Species
Charles Darwin
Your Inner Fish
Neil Shubin
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'AAI 2007 Conference' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #67256 by cyris8400 on September 3, 2007 at 1:35 am
The Atheist Hitler myth needs a widespread and public debunking. It's pseudohistory and propaganda. Hitler's invocations of God in Mein Kampf and his collected speeches don't seem to convince these apologists (cognitive dissonance), and neither do the "Gott Mitt Uns" Nazi belt-buckles.A picture says a thousand words. When confronted with the Atheist Hitler myth, deploy these photo albums of Nazis and religious figures, and Swastikas and Crosses:
http://nobeliefs.com/mementoes.htm
http://nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
A number of the photos come from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
Other Comments by cyris8400