Thursday, April 19, 2007 | Reason : In the News | print version

Print | Comments |

Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

by Mapantsula, Daily Kos

Thanks to dimon for the link.

Reposted from:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/19/18451/0971

Dinesh D'Souza writes:

http://newsbloggers.aol.com/2007/04/18/where-is-atheism-when-bad-things-happen/

Notice something interesting about the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings? Atheists are nowhere to be found. Every time there is a public gathering there is talk of God and divine mercy and spiritual healing. Even secular people like the poet Nikki Giovanni use language that is heavily drenched with religious symbolism and meaning.

The atheist writer Richard Dawkins has observed that according to the findings of modern science, the universe has all the properties of a system that is utterly devoid of meaning. The main characteristic of the universe is pitiless indifference. Dawkins further argues that we human beings are simply agglomerations of molecules, assembled into functional units over millennia of natural selection, and as for the soul--well, that's an illusion!

To no one's surprise, Dawkins has not been invited to speak to the grieving Virginia Tech community. What this tells me is that if it's difficult to know where God is when bad things happen, it is even more difficult for atheism to deal with the problem of evil. The reason is that in a purely materialist universe, immaterial things like good and evil and souls simply do not exist. For scientific atheists like Dawkins, Cho's shooting of all those people can be understood in this way--molecules acting upon molecules.

If this is the best that modern science has to offer us, I think we need something more than modern science.

It is hardly surprising that Dinesh D'Souza is once again not only profoundly mistaken but also deeply offensive. But I thought it worthwhile to say something in response, not because most people would put the point in the same morally reptilian manner as D'Souza, but because there is at least some vague sense amongst people that we atheists don't quite grasp the enormity of Monday's events, that we tend towards a cold-hearted manner of thinking, that we condescend to expressions of community, meaning, or bereavement.

So I will tell you, Mr D'Souza, what I grasp and where I am to be found.

I understand why my wife was frantic on Monday morning, trying to contact me through jammed phone lines. I can still feel the tenor of her voice resonating in my veins when she got through to me, how she shook with relief and tears. I remember how my mother looked the last time she thought she might have lost a son, so I have a vivid image of her and a thousand other mothers that hasn't quite left my mind yet.

I am to be found in Lane Stadium, looking out over a sea of maroon and orange, trying not to break down when someone mentions the inviolability of the classroom and the bond between a teacher and his students. That is my classroom, Mr D'Souza, my students, my chosen responsibility in this godless life, my small office in the care of humanity and its youth.

I know that brutal death can come unannounced into any life, but that we should aspire to look at our approaching death with equanimity, with a sense that it completes a well-walked trail, that it is a privilege to have our stories run through to their proper end. I don't need to live forever to live once and to live completely. It is precisely because I don't believe there is an afterlife that I am so horrified by the stabbing and slashing and tattering of so many lives around me this week, the despoliation and ruination of the only thing each of us will ever have.

We atheists do not believe in gods, or angels, or demons, or souls that endure, or a meeting place after all is said and done where more can be said and done and the point of it all revealed. We don't believe in the possibility of redemption after our lives, but the necessity of compassion in our lives. We believe in people, in their joys and pains, in their good ideas and their wit and wisdom. We believe in human rights and dignity, and we know what it is for those to be trampled on by brutes and vandals. We may believe that the universe is pitilessly indifferent but we know that friends and strangers alike most certainly are not. We despise atrocity, not because a god tells us that it is wrong, but because if not massacre then nothing could be wrong.

I am to be found on the drillfield with a candle in my hand. "Amazing Grace" is a beautiful song, and I can sing it for its beauty and its peacefulness. I don't believe in any god, but I do believe in those people who have struggled through pain and found beauty and peace in their religion. I am not at odds with them any more than I am at odds with Americans when we sing the "Star-Spangled Banner" just because I am not American. I can sing "Lean on Me" and chant for the Hokies in just the same way and for just the same reason.

I know that the theory of natural selection is the best explanation for the emergence and development of human beings and other species. I know that our bodies are composed of flesh, bone, and blood, and cells, and molecules. I also know that this does not account for all aspects of our lives, but I know no-one who ever thought it did. That is why we have science, and novels, and friendships, and poetry, and practical jokes, and photography, and a sense of awe at the immensity of time and the planet's natural history, and walks with loved ones along the Huckleberry Trail, and atheist friends who keep kosher because, well just because, and passionate reverence for both those heroes who believed and those who did not, and have all this without needing a god to stitch together the tapestry of life.

I believe this young man was both sick and vicious, that his actions were both heinous and the result of a phenomenon that we must try to understand precisely so that we can prevent it in future. I have no sympathy for him. Given what he has done, I am not particularly sorry he has spared the world his continued existence; there was no possibility of redemption for him. You think we atheists have difficulty with the concept of evil. Quite the contrary. We can accept a description of this man as evil. We just don't think that is an explanation. That is why we are exasperated at your mindless demonology.

I feel humbled by the sense of composure of a family who lost someone on Monday. I will not insult that dignity by pretending there is sense to be made of this senselessness, or that there is some greater consolation to be found in the loss of a husband and son.

I know my students are now more than students.

You can find us next week in the bloodied classrooms of a violated campus, trying to piece our thoughts and lives and studies back together.

With or without a belief in a god, with or without your asinine bigotry, we will make progress, we will breathe life back into our university, I will succeed in explaining this or that point, slowly, eventually, in a ham-handed way, at risk of tears half-way through, my students will come to feel comfortable again in a classroom with no windows or escape route, and hell yes we will prevail.

You see Mr D'Souza, I am an atheist professor at Virginia Tech and a man of great faith. Not faith in your god. Faith in my people.

Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2007 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 109 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #33287 by Lagomort on April 19, 2007 at 7:43 pm

bravissimo

Other Comments by Lagomort

2. Comment #33289 by BT Murtagh on April 19, 2007 at 7:45 pm

Beautiful.

Other Comments by BT Murtagh

3. Comment #33290 by krogercomplete on April 19, 2007 at 7:47 pm

Bravo.

Other Comments by krogercomplete

4. Comment #33291 by filthyatheist on April 19, 2007 at 7:49 pm

Amen

Other Comments by filthyatheist

5. Comment #33297 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 7:54 pm

Very emotive. Contrast this essay brimming over with compassion and intelligence and the wretched article written by D'Sousa. Since D'Sousa has shown a consistent inability to feel shame for his hateful opinions, one almost is compelled to feel it for him.

Other Comments by Logicel

6. Comment #33300 by Daedalus on April 19, 2007 at 8:00 pm

D'Sousa demonstrates once again how the term "conservative intellectual" is an oxymoron. Atheists are scarce amongst university faculties?

Other Comments by Daedalus

7. Comment #33304 by dreamflow on April 19, 2007 at 8:18 pm

Brilliant. I've link it here: Infidel Links #2

Other Comments by dreamflow

8. Comment #33305 by MarkSmith on April 19, 2007 at 8:23 pm

Thank you. Your eloquence at a time like this is heartwarming.

In an above comment, Logicel states he might be compelled to feel shame for D'Sousa. Well, if D'Sousa has the character to write letter of apology to you, I might also. But I think a better course of action is to inform his blog editor, or Stanford of just how horribly he reflects on them. Does anyone have an address?

Other Comments by MarkSmith

9. Comment #33306 by Ev3nt H0riz0n on April 19, 2007 at 8:29 pm

That was truly beautiful...

Other Comments by Ev3nt H0riz0n

10. Comment #33309 by js5535 on April 19, 2007 at 8:37 pm

I hope D'Souza reads this and feels some stain on his conscience after that idiotic article of his. If he has any true sense of compassion he will apologize.
Neither atheists nor theists should use tragic events in which mental illness is clearly to blame for their own agendas.

Other Comments by js5535

11. Comment #33310 by CruciFiction on April 19, 2007 at 8:48 pm

Dinesh D'Souza is lower than a sea breeze. Scum.

Other Comments by CruciFiction

12. Comment #33311 by Jolly Wally on April 19, 2007 at 8:51 pm

Incredible :')

Other Comments by Jolly Wally

13. Comment #33315 by Russell Blackford on April 19, 2007 at 9:11 pm

We're dealing with somebody (I mean D'Souza) who has demonstrated that he has not an ounce of shame or dignity or basic human decency. I was never a fan of his - quite the opposite, I admit - but I did not imagine that he would sink so low as we've seen in his recent blog posts. I don't even think, now, that there's much point in trying to engage him: anyone can see immediately just how irresponsible and opportunistic he is. He really is scum.

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

14. Comment #33318 by Astroboy on April 19, 2007 at 9:18 pm

I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks!

Other Comments by Astroboy

15. Comment #33322 by krispar on April 19, 2007 at 9:30 pm

Dinesh D'Souza writes: Notice something interesting about the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings? Atheists are nowhere to be found.

Viewing the horrific events on TV last evening the following comment was made by a female fundamentalist Christian preacher.

"I came here to help and comfort today, but the reality is that some of the students that were shot, are in hell today"!!!!!!!

This sick remark, devoid of any compassion, is the logical consequence of convoluted theological thinking.

Other Comments by krispar

16. Comment #33324 by gdw on April 19, 2007 at 9:39 pm

I had to become a registered user to post this comment!!!!!

Mapantsula's article was one of the most moving pieces I have read in a long time. Very moving! Thank you very much!!!

Several paragraphs in this piece I could almost use as a personal manifesto.

Other Comments by gdw

17. Comment #33327 by Damien White on April 19, 2007 at 9:51 pm

Mr D'souza's political grandstanding is a disgrace, not least of all because it will increase the length of the healing period.

But it begs the question: who are the religious, to prey on people in their moment of weakness? Is it morally just that religion seeks to give consolation with the added hook of required belief, at the time when people are at their most addled and vulnerable.

Other Comments by Damien White

18. Comment #33329 by MorituriMax on April 19, 2007 at 9:54 pm

I don't understand where someone like that gets off telling us we're bad because we're atheists and where is Richard Dawkins when something like this happens?

I'd rather ask, "Where was God?" If we live in a universe with a supposed God that embodies all the good in the same universe, and yet this God won't step forward and stop the Cho Seung-Hui's of the world, then might we not as well LIVE in a universe with no God?

If all the prayers of the world are one-way, why do the religious believers think they have some kind of step up over us, the non-believers?

Other Comments by MorituriMax

19. Comment #33330 by foxfire on April 19, 2007 at 9:58 pm

Thank you Mapantsula - what you wrote was beautiful and true. My "heart" goes out to you all you Hokies.

Other Comments by foxfire

20. Comment #33342 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on April 19, 2007 at 10:57 pm

But it begs the question: who are the religious, to prey on people in their moment of weakness? Is it morally just that religion seeks to give consolation with the added hook of required belief, at the time when people are at their most addled and vulnerable.

Excellent point. This fraud is most readily perpetrated on the young, the injured, the weak or disoriented. Is it any wonder this criminal misrepresentation persists, when people are exposed to it, when least able to see the rotting support struts behind the painted facade?

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

21. Comment #33343 by caledonventures on April 19, 2007 at 11:05 pm

As our physiology evolved billions of years ago, so did compassion without the help of religion.

Regarding D'Souza, he surely must be one of the examples of Genetic Anomaly. Fortunately for him there is help, if wanted. Neuroscience, Stem Cell research and gentic engineering can explain his probs, then, correct his inherited unfavourable traits.

Other Comments by caledonventures

22. Comment #33344 by Satanburiedfossils on April 19, 2007 at 11:10 pm

I certainly do not want to make light of the terrible incident at VA Tech, but I feel compelled to consider a few points:

* Why is it that during a crisis, Xtians conveniently ignore the suspicious absence of the Deity? Unless, of course, there happens to be a positive outcome, in which case the same Xtians claim to be able to clearly discern the Deity's fingerprints!

* The Deity is never held to account for being negligent, nor is it considered deserving of rebuke when it is bad. Indeed, the Deity actually earns more favor when it is bad than when it is good.

* What exactly is the purpose of prayer in the wake of tragedies like this? That is, what do Xtians expect to achieve by praying? Is this merely a reflexive action? Does the Deity crave worship to the extent that Xtians must supplicate themselves at every opportunity, even in the aftermath of the most devastating events? Yet the Deity appears to be so capricious that even the most earnest prayers seem to hold little sway over it.

Following through on the previous point, the Deity's seemingly insatiable appetite for glorification is aptly addressed in Dave E. Matson essay "Does God Need Praise and Glory?" (excerpts follow):

The human ego ... knows no bounds. Therefore, it imagines that mankind was not only created by an all-powerful being, but that the entire universe was created for man's benefit! (The Bible is very man-orientated.) If that isn't bad enough, the human ego imagines that such a god absolutely craves human praise and attention. Thus, like a vain, oriental potentate, God takes great pains to cloak himself in GLORY. He wants to impress his created subjects.

...The god of the Bible sucks up praise like a vacuum cleaner sucking up dirt! As if he couldn't squeeze enough praise from his multitudes on earth, God has special beings installed around his very throne whose sole role is to sing his endless praise! Apparently God's ego is even bigger than man's and needs a steady stream of super-heated air to prop it up.

...Have you ever noticed how easily fountains of praise to the Lord tumble and flow in a great flood from Christian lips? It seems as if there was a contest to see who could praise God the most! Make God happy by singing his praises day and night!

...The working brain recognizes that the ego-happy god of the Bible, the GLORY seeker of the Old Testament and the praise-absorbing sponge of the Old and New Testaments, is a manmade creation. Primitive minds have extended their own faulty concepts of human greatness and vanity to come up with their idea of God, the super, Mideastern potentate. Such work cannot be "God's own words."

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/common_sense/praising_god.html

Other Comments by Satanburiedfossils

23. Comment #33347 by chauvinj on April 19, 2007 at 11:28 pm

Update

Mr D'Souza has more to say:

And boy the atheists are up in arms! They're mad as hell about my post "Where is Atheism When Bad Things Happen." Many responders informed me that tragedies are normally considered a problem for religion, not atheism. Where is God when bad things happen? Yes, people, I know this. My point was that if evil and suffering are a problem for religion--and they are--they are an even bigger problem for atheism.
The reason is suggested from the quotation given above. When there is a tragedy like the one at Virginia Tech, the ones who are suffering cannot help asking questions, "Why did this have to happen?" "Why is there so much evil in the world?" "How can I possibly go on after losing my child?" And so on.
In my post I noted that Richard Dawkins had not been invited to address the mourners at Virginia Tech. Several atheists--who haven't yet lost their fundamentalist habit of reading--took this sarcastic statement literally. "So what? The Pope hasn't been invited either!" My point was that atheism has nothing to offer in the face of tragedy except C'est la vie. Deal with it. Get over it. This is why the ceremonies were suffused with religious rhetoric. Only the language of religion seems appropriate to the magnitude of tragedy. Only God seems to have the power to heal hearts in such circumstances. If someone started to read from Dawkins on why there is no good and no evil in the universe, people would start vomiting or leaving.
One clever writer informs me that atheists don't deny meaning, they simply insist that meaning is not inherent in the universe, it is created by us. Okay, pal, here's the Virginia Tech situation. Go create some meaning and share it with the rest of us Give us that atheist sermon with you in the pulpit of the campus chapel. I'm not being facetious here. I really want to hear what the atheist would tell the grieving mothers.

Other Comments by chauvinj

24. Comment #33350 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on April 19, 2007 at 11:34 pm

I really want to hear what the atheist would tell the grieving mothers.

As opposed to that they are (possibly) burning in Hell, or (possibly) sipping milk and feasting on Honey in Heaven, but to be perfectly honest we haven't the first idea what has happened to them, if anything?

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

25. Comment #33354 by pissinintothewind on April 19, 2007 at 11:58 pm

Sick Bastard

Other Comments by pissinintothewind

26. Comment #33358 by stevencarrwork on April 20, 2007 at 12:12 am

I remember the wise words of Jesus when he was asked about innocent people killed in a horrible tragedy.

Luke 13:4-5 'Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.'

When do atheists offer similar words of comfort for the distressed and bereaved?

Never. That shows you how morally bankrupt atheism is.

Other Comments by stevencarrwork

27. Comment #33359 by ICONIC FREEDOM on April 20, 2007 at 12:21 am

Professor,

Your message inspires, thank you.

This is a tragedy, a tragedy for the loss of potential of each and every victim for which words do not comfort; only the solace of time will heal this scar.

Our moments with one another are indeed fleeting, placing your desire of where to spend those moments becomes even more important as you move past this tragedy.

We support your struggle now, followed by your triumph later.

Other Comments by ICONIC FREEDOM

28. Comment #33363 by Absinthius on April 20, 2007 at 12:29 am

This is beautifull, i can't belive how short-minded some people can be when it comes to their personal arrogance regarding their religion. D'Souza is obviously just trying to throw extra oil on the fire, instead of trying to show compassion for the atheistic victims of this drama, basically denying their capability or right to feel bad about this. Im glad atheists (or at least the larger part of them) do have the decency to let people deal with this the way they feel is the best.

Other Comments by Absinthius

29. Comment #33364 by Gordon Brown on April 20, 2007 at 12:32 am

stevenkarrwork (No. 27):

Luke 13:4-5 'Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them�do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.'

Words of comfort for the distressed and bereaved? Sounds more like a self-interested and thinly-veiled threat to my ears.

But that's of no consequence here. Kudos to Prof. Mapantsula for providing an elegant counterpoint to the execrable, vile and wretched rant of Mr. D'Souza.

Other Comments by Gordon Brown

30. Comment #33365 by stevencarrwork on April 20, 2007 at 12:38 am

GORDON BROWN
Words of comfort for the distressed and bereaved? Sounds more like a self-interested and thinly-veiled threat to my ears.

CARR
Strange that the words of Jesus are so relevant to innocent victims killed by tragedy, and yet the religious just ignore whatever Jesus happens to say on the subject, even when it directly speaks to the situation.

Perhaps because they can see the lack of compassion shown and instinctively know that it would portray their Saviour in a bad light?

Other Comments by stevencarrwork

31. Comment #33366 by Gordon Brown on April 20, 2007 at 12:46 am

Thanks for the clarification, Steven. I didn't sense the irony in your first post.

Other Comments by Gordon Brown

32. Comment #33376 by gcdavis on April 20, 2007 at 1:04 am

This is one of the most heartfelt, timely and profound pieces of rhetoric that I have heard in many years. Mapantsula, your students are very lucky to have you to support them through this appalling period of their lives.

Other Comments by gcdavis

33. Comment #33380 by MartinSGill on April 20, 2007 at 1:25 am

Wonderful

Other Comments by MartinSGill

34. Comment #33386 by rabadi on April 20, 2007 at 1:46 am

UPDATE Reply from the VT professor to D'Souza's response:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/19/18451/0971

We think the pain is complete and absolute. We know it is.

We think that nothing can heal these hearts, that time can only take the sharpness off the agony, that only in time can beauty be wholeheartedly seen again or laughter felt deep inside.

We insist there is no sense or meaning to be made of this massacre. There was only sense and meaning to be created within the lives of each person gunned down. That is why we are horrified by it. That is precisely why it is so horrific.

We don't believe these people have died for anything: God's plan, as a beacon to the rest of us, to be a vivid memento mori for all. We just believe they have died, brutally and without mercy. We refuse to lie to grieving mothers out of some patronising sense that a pleasant myth is more respectful than a terrible truth.

Those of us with the slightest shred of deceny do not tell widows to deal with it, to get over it. That the world can be callous is no reason to be so myself. I know that no family could ever get over this loss, that no family should ever be expected to get over this loss -- either by themselves, by religious rhetoricians bearing false platitudes, or by inane political pundits -- but that not getting over the loss does not preclude some other kind of happiness, some other source of joy, at some other time. Not now, not in this moment, not when they have moved on, but only when it comes to them one day, like light dawning slowly.

We know the world is cold, and that only people can make it warmer. We believe we can live in this imperfection, like a child can live without fulfilling her desperate wish for wings. We rail against injustice and tragedy, not the absence of deeper guarantees.

Some of us are those grieving mothers and wives and friends and colleagues. Some of us are inconsolable, but dignified for all that.

There is no language appropriate to the magnitude of the tragedy. Not stories about a poor man nailed to a cross, not fine words about a time for healing and a time for dying, not even the lines of the poet who, in the midst of his own horror, struggles to ask:

How can I embellish this carnival of slaughter,
How decorate the massacre?

But it is that same poet who also writes of death:

I have certainly
no faith in miracles, yet I long
that when death come to take me
from this great song
of a world, it permits me to return
to your door and knock
and knock
and call out: "If you need someone
to share your anguish, your simplest pain,
then let me be the one.
If not, let me again
embark, this time never
to return, in that final direction,
forever.

Spring has come to Virginia. Monday morning was the last snow we will have this season. All those who have come to Blacksburg this week have told us how beautiful our countryside is. They're right, of course, there is all this terrible, unforgiving beauty here.

Other Comments by rabadi

35. Comment #33393 by amazeen on April 20, 2007 at 2:25 am

My heart goes out to Prof. Mapantsula and everybody else at Virginia Tech.

Mr. D'Souza: You say atheists can�t believe in such things as good and evil. I believe in evil, you sir are proof of it�s existence.

Other Comments by amazeen

36. Comment #33394 by GeneMachine on April 20, 2007 at 2:27 am

Incredibly moving writing from the professor. I am proud to be sharing the planet with this person. I cannot say the same about that bigot D'Souza.

If we needed any further proof that religion has no claim to governance over morality, we just got it.

Thank you professor. Despite the awful recent events, you have brightened my day.

Other Comments by GeneMachine

37. Comment #33399 by RascoHeldall on April 20, 2007 at 2:55 am

What a wonderfully dignified response to a person who deserves nothing but contempt.

Other Comments by RascoHeldall

38. Comment #33407 by beeline on April 20, 2007 at 3:26 am

It's tremendously easy to shout, criticise and hurl abuse. But it's just the stupid person's substitute for intelligence, humility and compassion.

D'Souza is an embarrassing brat to everyone who knows him. Including himself, I suspect.

Other Comments by beeline

39. Comment #33411 by hogi on April 20, 2007 at 3:38 am

23. Comment #33344 by Satanburiedfossils on April 19, 2007 at 11:10 pm

[...] the praise-absorbing sponge of the Old and New Testaments [...]

hahaha... hilarious!

Other Comments by hogi

40. Comment #33415 by Hugo on April 20, 2007 at 3:52 am

#33322 by krispar, EXACTLY!
I am very happy that I am identified as a silent respectful atheist.
I would hate to be identified with those god loving preaching vultures of human misery.
But still so many theists don't seem to mind and continue to profess the "beauty" of their delusion.

Other Comments by Hugo

41. Comment #33416 by steevo on April 20, 2007 at 3:56 am

Truely inspirational....almost saganesque!

Other Comments by steevo

42. Comment #33419 by denoir on April 20, 2007 at 4:00 am

I'm going to be a bit of a devil's advocate here, but I do think that D'Souza has a relevant point.

Wishful thinking and delusions can be comforting. Those people are tragically dead and nothing will change that. So what remains is the question of how the families and friends will cope with the loss. The truth, which is that their loved ones died a pointless death and that they are just gone and dead isn't going to comfort them. Reality does not owe us anything.

In many cases denying reality can have bad consequences but in some cases it makes no difference. If it helps people to cope with the loss and the stress to delude themselves that there was a point to the death of their loved ones - why not? Atheism can't offer anything in that regard because it is not in the business of spreading wishful thinking and comforting delusions.

The point is very simple - false beliefs can be useful. If a person is capable to overcome a major emotional trauma by motivation through the willing suspension of disbelief and through self-deception, then so be it. My empathy to their tragic loss is stronger than my need to show them that they are deluded.

Other Comments by denoir

43. Comment #33426 by macronencer on April 20, 2007 at 4:30 am

This is so moving, I nearly cried. What a beautiful statement of humanity! Thank you.

Other Comments by macronencer

44. Comment #33430 by posiedon on April 20, 2007 at 4:57 am

No comment here from weefree aka David Robertson?
Or has he been banned again?

Other Comments by posiedon

45. Comment #33441 by phasmagigas on April 20, 2007 at 5:39 am

quote

To no one's surprise, Dawkins has not been invited to speak to the grieving Virginia Tech community. What this tells me is that if it's difficult to know where God is when bad things happen, it is even more difficult for atheism to deal with the problem of evil

unquote

i hate this bit in particular, its trying to argue a case with a thought experiment, ie, as if RD is really going to be invited across the atlantic to, well to do what?? make people feel better? i hold my face in my hands.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

46. Comment #33445 by phasmagigas on April 20, 2007 at 5:57 am

dinesh replies to those who see the 'dawkins visit' in literal terms and laughs at them. We know he didnt mean it, any non believer could share sympathy and silence, the difference is that we dont also shove a dummy in the mouth of grievers.

its still amazes me as an expat living in the USA (so i perhaps notice it nore than others) how the most pious people i know are also the most shallow and materialistic, they gorge on factory farmed meat daily, own the biggest trucks, the biggest homes, the biggest TV's own, watch and read the most junk and use the most chemicals on their lawns, not cause an effect of course but it shows me how not to live.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

47. Comment #33447 by savroD on April 20, 2007 at 6:00 am

Good reply though I would say something a little different with respect to the statement of D'souza. I would note that his attempt to mix the language of religious gibberish, (soul and evil) with logical scientific observations is stupid and symbolic of his grade school mentality. This jerk should be kicked back to grade school.

Other Comments by savroD

48. Comment #33451 by GBile on April 20, 2007 at 6:17 am

Denoir,

Wishful thinking and delusions can be comforting. Those people are tragically dead and nothing will change that. So what remains is the question of how the families and friends will cope with the loss. The truth, which is that their loved ones died a pointless death and that they are just gone and dead isn't going to comfort them. Reality does not owe us anything.

Why is it required that people have to be 'comforted', have to be able 'to cope with their loss'. The supposed neccessity of this is what religion exploits with their strangling promises of 'she is better of now' or 'he is is now with the Lord' (fill in the nonsense yourself).
Dramatic events happen and lives will change irrepairably. That people will eventually cope is often true, but we should not fall into the trap of inventing a nice story, a pacifier, or an afterlife where in the end everything will be great. Genuine compassion, love and friendship is what people in these circumstances need, no placebos.

Other Comments by GBile

49. Comment #33454 by denoir on April 20, 2007 at 7:05 am

GBile,

Dramatic events happen and lives will change irreparably. That people will eventually cope is often true, but we should not fall into the trap of inventing a nice story, a pacifier, or an afterlife where in the end everything will be great. Genuine compassion, love and friendship is what people in these circumstances need, no placebos.

Why?

There are are obvious situations where truth is better than fantasy. If a lion comes towards you, imagining that it isn't there will just hurt you. The situation of coping with loss, especially a pointless loss like this one doesn't fall into that category.

Telling the truth doesn't always lead to the best results. If you see an overweight person walking on the street, you won't approach him saying "Holy crap, you're fat! You really need to exercise!". You won't do it because that person's feelings will be hurt if you point out the obvious truth. You will have increased suffering in the world.

The religious coping with grief falls into the same category. Insist on pointing out the truth to them and you will increase their suffering.

Other Comments by denoir

50. Comment #33455 by djmagaro on April 20, 2007 at 7:17 am

Mr. D'Sousa is a notorious provocateur, a member of the parasitic chattering class that has grown exponentially since the invention of the Internet. As near as I can tell, he produces nothing of enduring value: he's not a scientist, inventor, artist, factory worker, shop-keeper, industrialist, entreprenuer, economist, teacher, professor, policeman, soldier, peacekeeper, peacemaker, social worker, counsellor, elected offical, and so on. He's a pundit, and like most pundits, he argues that his work has value because he's "advancing discussion" or that he's participating in the "war of ideas." Alas, his ideas are not his own and they are poorly presented at that. Were I a conversative or a Christian I would be upset not only by his most un-Christian callousness, but by his claiming to speak for conservatives and theists alike.

Furthermore, his throwing down the gauntlet to atheists smacks of the sort of cynical opportunism I've come expect from most professional pundits. He's taking advantage of the naturally high emotions surrounding this tragedy to increase his name recognition and advance his own career - a career that had been fading of late in the wake of withering criticism from his fellow conservatives who accuse him of opportunism and pseudo-intellectualism.

Other Comments by djmagaro

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 | Next | Last