601. The Transcendental Argument for God

Comment #88412 by phil rimmer on November 16, 2007 at 2:06 pm

My PE teacher, scornful of my attempt to get out of games with a headache and a poorly finger, announced to the rest of the class, "I always know a boy is lying to me when he gives me two excuses."

A related issue is why life's troubles are distributed so unjustly. The answer I think is that they are not distributed unjustly, for life continues far beyond death, and we shall all continue to experience both joy and pain and agonize over ethical decisions for a long time to come – and on average all people will get about the same deal. Moreover I think the distinction between individual persons is in a sense illusory: we are all in this together and in some fundamental sense the other person's suffering is my suffering also, and the other person's joy is my joy too.

Dianelos knows neither excuse is up to the job...

Did I just experience a little frisson of schadenfreude at his possible discomfort? You know, I think I did.

602. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87613 by phil rimmer on November 12, 2007 at 3:22 pm

krisking:In the end, I don't believe it is my responsibility to convince them.

Is it no one's responsibility?

603. Excerpt from 'The Portable Atheist'

Comment #87588 by phil rimmer on November 12, 2007 at 2:40 pm

Verily, the man turns wine into wisdom.

604. Neuroscience and Moral Politics: Chomsky's Intellectual Progeny

Comment #87579 by phil rimmer on November 12, 2007 at 2:12 pm

I'm just guessing, but the "Coevolution of Parochial Altruism and War" looks like the typical zero-sum outcome of a resource limited system.

We might imagine that for a brief while we are at a point of least resource pressure, where the definition of parochial might reach its most extensive. Now might be our only chance of jumping out of our biology.

605. Bill Moyers interviews Jonathan Miller

Comment #87389 by phil rimmer on November 12, 2007 at 2:39 am

One of my favourite jokes of his from "Beyond the Fringe" was-

I'm not so much a Jew as Jew-ish. I don't go the whole hog.

Anyone doubting that an atheist could experience life at its fullest should look at the riches that this man has produced.

606. The Transcendental Argument for God

Comment #87281 by phil rimmer on November 11, 2007 at 4:42 pm

Bit like sex: takes at least two. If there's only one, it's not sex.

But you do get your own way....

607. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87190 by phil rimmer on November 11, 2007 at 12:21 pm

For me the prospect of the eternal is like the kiss of death.

Which is more beautiful, a perfect copy of a rose or a real rose in your garden? The transient, I contend, is more astonishing by far than the deathless.

To me, the spectre of eternal life, seems like the offer of no life at all, indeed no time at all. It is the chiaroscuro of our lived lives that we surely crave.

608. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #86427 by phil rimmer on November 9, 2007 at 7:41 am

Cut and paste job

ADH

I'm sorry. I must ask again. Why would you not wish for (pray for) your children to find the truth, rather than to find faith?

Surely you wish for them to find the very best thing, not the very best thing that you have imagined so far. In praying for Truth, in your mind you have opened that door for them a little bit wider, imagined a finer outcome for them than you might have so far managed for yourself. This least little speck of humility, opens the door for you too.

Faith or Truth, which is the greater?

If faith is the greater (Only Believe!)then we have to accept that it is our mental condition and not our mental content that is the most desirable.

"Pretend to be a Christian. Go through the motions every day and you will wake up one morning and find you are no longer pretending" This is what the the idea of faith invites us to do. It is a fantastically successful transfiguring meme and it is the way humans change themselves from anything to anything...going through the motions until you get it right. And thats the point. The idea of faith as a mental conditioner works just as well for any mental content, Christianity, Judaism, National Socialism...

Finish cut and paste job.

You were in fact clear to point out later that FAITH had to be Christian faith (of course) but then admitted for some Christians this had gone wrong. I propose the concept of truth is self-correcting. "But is it true?" the only true guide. How can you lose with a concept like that?

Oh and (Look away now Coretemprising) Thanks.

609. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #86406 by phil rimmer on November 9, 2007 at 6:49 am

Coretemprising.

Why should I want to debate with you? I agree with you, at least on all the important stuff. I want to debate with someone I disagree with. (If they'd only bloody answer my questions.)

Being polite? Just comes natural I 'spose.

If you feel all icky, look away.

Maybe we could post some kind of warning flag when whacky views are being voiced?

610. The Transcendental Argument for God

Comment #86351 by phil rimmer on November 9, 2007 at 3:13 am

You know what? I am going to call Dianelos a full-on creationist.

Hurrah!

This is the only explanation for why a seemingly intelligent man should believe positing a universal consciousness as a terminating point for the questions posed by science is in any way satisfying.

The man needs closure and quick. Stultifying!

His subjective data- "This is great!"
Our subjective data- "Its pants!"

His mantra- "My explanation is much more satisfying etc." never has the common human decency to add (because of the sheer evidence of the dissenting views) the words "to me".

611. On Being Not Muslim Enough

Comment #86342 by phil rimmer on November 9, 2007 at 2:36 am

Nick

I don't quite get this woman. The article above is about her feeling non Muslim. But her role in her work is ALL about being Muslim and looking at the world through a Muslim lens. What is she saying...that there is huge amounts of Islamic fundamentalism in the UK...she doesn't say that, it's hinted at only. So what's her point, she's not accepted by Islamo nutters - fine, find other friends or become an Islamo nutter to fit in....simple!

I may be putting words in her mouth, but what she is saying is that amongst moderate Muslims (in a social but not religious or political context) there is still much "tribalism", demanding high levels of conformity.

This is bad news for us because if liberally inclined Muslims tend to be excluded from social Muslim situations, a reformation or opening-up of the faith seems a complete non-starter.

Her Guardian efforts have been (as far as I can see)about just such an opening up. The article represents a reversal in her optimism.

612. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #86160 by phil rimmer on November 8, 2007 at 1:05 pm

167. Comment #85501 by Dianelos Georgoudis

Don't know how I missed this one. Disagree.

In post 96 I describe how moral progress is made, from, for instance, a particular moral precept, concern over causing harm to others. Progress is made by extending the definition of harmable others. No new precepts are required. No other standards need be referenced. (And the precautionary principle of over inclusion is not immoral per se.)

Your concept of TRANSCENDING standards is, as ever, a meaningless hurdle thrown in the way of the atheist. Moral standards evolve.

613. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #85981 by phil rimmer on November 7, 2007 at 4:54 pm

ADH

I'm sorry. I must ask again. Why would you not wish for (pray for) your children to find the truth, rather than to find faith?

Surely you wish for them to find the very best thing, not the very best thing that you have imagined so far. In praying for Truth, in your mind you have opened that door for them a little bit wider, imagined a finer outcome for them than you might have so far managed for yourself. This least little speck of humility, opens the door for you too.

Faith or Truth, which is the greater?

If faith is the greater (Only Believe!)then we have to accept that it is our mental condition and not our mental content that is the most desirable.

"Pretend to be a Christian. Go through the motions every day and you will wake up one morning and find you are no longer pretending" This is what the the idea of faith invites us to do. It is a fantastically successful transfiguring meme and it is the way humans change themselves from anything to anything...going through the motions until you get it right. And thats the point. The idea of faith as a mental conditioner works just as well for any mental content, Christianity, Judaism, National Socialism...

614. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #85644 by phil rimmer on November 6, 2007 at 3:00 pm

ADH

I am hoping and praying that they come to faith.

Maybe the terrible risks your children run (in being roasted for getting it wrong) could be reduced if, in fact, you prayed that they come to Truth rather than faith. A little personal humility about the certainty about exactly what you know, cannot be bad.

Truth must surely tower over faiths.

615. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85381 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 4:15 pm

There's cheese in a can!!!

Sick, sick, sick world.

I'll console myself with the Sociopath Next Door.

'night

616. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85322 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 1:38 pm

Dawkins couldn't function at the high level we enjoy if he didn't have several people keeping an eye out for trouble.

But, Dammit, Dr B, how are we newbies ever going to learn to hunt if the prey don't come near us? We're big boys...and girls, and we've got our mates round us....

Maybe he's just done awful things I haven't seen. I'll shut up.

617. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85275 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 11:53 am

epeeist

I have to agree with your (and Corylus's) analysis.

But the harm is??

As for the humour bypass, its his flock I feel sorry for....

618. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85270 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 11:43 am

Flea,

So, John Lennox's 'God's Undertaker, it is. I hope you haven't sold me a pup. The McGrath met a sticky end.... (see post 27 in this thread.)

619. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85253 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 11:15 am

Josh,

The banning is too bad. You cannot do this. I have stuff I want to say to the man.

Please reconsider. Fleas are ultimately harmless.

620. AAI 07

Comment #85249 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 11:03 am

notsobad

why? Can't he have a different opinion from others, especially the majority? Isn't that what atheism is - at least outside the EU - still about?

Like Brian I want the discussion to continue. I think there's a bunch of missing pieces from the Libertarian argument that I need to hear about, like how people actually function psychologically. (B.F.Skinner showed how positive reinforcement trains us far more effectively than negative, and his sentiments were far from liberal)

What pisses me off is we're stuck in top level stuff when we could be examining real data and figuring out how to do things better.

I actually believe Chapman is right about fear (alright call it fear of responsibility if you wish, the problem is the same) driving Americans to the "Insurer of Last Resort". How do Libertarians solve the problem of fear? Its great when we are all Howard Roarks, or Scooters or Notsobads, but me? I screwed up. Society's safety net caught me.

Dogma died in UK politics when "New Labour" got in and occupied what by (European) consensus is the centre ground. Conservatives recently mirrored the move, abandoning scrupulously free-enterprise policies for the pragmatic mix and match ones that might get them re-elected. (Even their own followers wanted public health insurance, it being free of small-print denying you the right to life on a technicality.)

This acknowledgment that the populace wanted free-market wealth creation AND a modest safety net is the output of quite an extended social experiment. It is the experiment being urged by us seeming lefties on you seeming righties. The last thing it is, is based on DOGMA.

Don't call us DOGMATIC and we'll return the compliment. Tell us how the experiment could be changed to get a better result. Listen when we suggest that fear of falling off the tightrope without a safety net slows you down.

People are complicated. Society more so. Don't be fooled into thinking there is an elegant solution to creating a successful one.

And please keep talking. We have to get this right.

621. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85180 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 8:41 am

101. Comment #85167 by Calvin

What flummoxes me, Flea, is that the theist material above seems so poor. I've read a few of these books and despaired. I always make a point of reading reviews or blog commentaries of these things in the religious press or on religious websites, (Commonweal.com is my favourite.) and despaired again.

Tell me, Flea, which one is the good one? I promise I'll read it and get back to you here.

622. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85143 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 5:32 am

if our ethical beliefs have merely evolved anthropologically and one can therefore transcend their current state then on what standard can one appeal to when transcending them. I wonder how an atheist not stuck in a loop might answer this question.

Appealing to standards IS loopy behaviour(sic).

I can't answer simply, and I suspect I can't answer completely. I know that the progress I hope I have made in my personal ethical standards, as I continue to grow up, is related to my improving ability to discern harm to others, and perhaps a growing carelessness for myself. (I've had a hell of a lot of fun, but vicarious pleasures are coming to dominate now.)

Society grows up too, it seems. The franchise of sentient, harmable beings grows apace. (Goodness, first peasants and now women and other higher primates. Even foreigners!) As our list of friends grows, so do our responsibilities. We naturally treasure wealth after all.

623. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85125 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 3:49 am

Of course we could be the subject of a wind up...

I agree. My personal theory is that the near super-human mix of wit and wisdom points to us being the subject of the ultimate Turing test. (Hence his smiling visage.)

I suspect the CIA of funding the Benway Computer Program (designed to "fuck with the minds" of their adversaries).

But why do they test it on this site you ask? Well, its obvious. If they can fool a bunch of Atheists, they can fool anyone!

You have been warned.

[EDIT Sadly their "Dianelos Reloaded" Program seems to be stuck in a loop at present...]

624. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85108 by phil rimmer on November 5, 2007 at 2:12 am

Great news. The Doc is back!

Welcome back, Dr B. We've missed that mischievous smile.

625. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85039 by phil rimmer on November 4, 2007 at 4:10 pm

Diacanu

You do know that Matthew Chapman is only on loan??

626. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #84977 by phil rimmer on November 4, 2007 at 11:53 am

A Beattie quote about her book-

The New Atheists: The Twilight of Reason and the War on Religion - from the Introduction: In its war on religion, scientific rationalism constitutes the latest phase in the West's long history of domination by which it has sought to defeat every form of difference, including religious difference. The vast majority of the world's religious believers belong among non-Western cultures, and they include many millions of women whose views are seldom represented by their scholarly elites. This means that we need to cultivate a much greater awareness of both the limits and the oppressive effects of a debate dominated by the opinions of a small clique of white English-speaking men staging a mock battle about rationality and God, which fails to address the most significant humanitarian questions of our time. This includes the many different roles played by religion in sustaining and generating hope, meaning and creativity, without which we would be less than the humans we are.

627. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #84974 by phil rimmer on November 4, 2007 at 11:43 am

I keep my Flea books in the loo. They don't last very long.

I used to prefer to move with the Times, (I hate Rupert Murdoch), but this new material comes in a much handier size.

628. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #84971 by phil rimmer on November 4, 2007 at 11:39 am

Diacanu

Polly Toynbee and Martin Amis.

629. AAI 07

Comment #84728 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 11:05 am

The term used in the UK is

"Health care, free at the point of delivery."

Its personal cost is clearly written on our wage slips.

630. AAI 07

Comment #84725 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 10:45 am

NMcC

I'm a capitalist and I don't see a tax problem per se.

631. Rome playing politics

Comment #84723 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 10:38 am

Viva Zapatero!

Grayling is getting better and better. I like his Hitch style joke at the end, but shouldn't it be-

[a conflict] between matador Zapatero and a load of Papal bull?

632. AAI 07

Comment #84706 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 9:26 am

Logicel

Re: Chuck Feeney

I sure would like to meet him. I'd also be intrigued to find out when and why he gave $250,000 to Sinn Fein. Depending on the timing that donation might prove to be either his most or his least philanthropic act.

633. AAI 07

Comment #84694 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 8:01 am

Steve

This is why I feel that representative democracy is the only way,

Agreed

On the narrow (!) issue of nuclear energy investment etc. we have to have experts who have experts working on our behalf. But I feel a formally derived set of indicators on voter desires about broad issues, personal taxation, corporate taxation, health spend , education spend etc. just helps everyone. It even helps ministers manage the unfortunate truths he feels the population has to face up to.

Poll results are rightly dismissed as of modest significance. A statistically devastating poll, open to the entire electorate, of scrupulous integrity and longevity, with fleshed out geographical detail would give politicians proper insight into voters minds for the first time, and also be the beginning of an educational process for the electorate as the economic facts of life are better laid bare for them by politicians and pundits.

[EDIT By simply asking the electorate for their view on selected items you may be forcing them for the first time to consider what their view actually is.]

634. AAI 07

Comment #84682 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 7:21 am

Deeply sorry to hear your news, Scooter.

An epitaph I have always cherished is-

"To have been born at all is miracle enough."

Phil

635. AAI 07

Comment #84681 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 7:18 am

Brian

Perhaps then initially as a recommendation, with league tables showing how closely government spending mirrors tax payer wishes?

Exactly! This stuff would be generated by the Office for National Statistics (in the UK), a body which should soon become independent of government like the Bank of England. The nature of the indexes would be the subject of parliamentary debate and added to as necessary.

636. AAI 07

Comment #84669 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 7:01 am

Symbols of conspicuous consumption are essential. They tell me which way to run.

On the other hand a rich man or woman living inconspicuously is someone it would be worth talking to. Denied nothing, but choosing modesty, they likely know a thing or to about how to live a happy life.

637. AAI 07

Comment #84664 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 6:49 am

Direct voter influence of taxation levels and governmental spending would be catastrophic. Carefully considered governmental budgets, balanced against a myriad different requirements would be trashed on a regular basis. The public can be fickle and can also be easily, if briefly, manipulated by non-democratic forces and random events.

What might work is a right as a voter to take part in a rolling poll of views on such topics. Carefully administered for neutrality of phrasing, these public indexes of formally and democratically collected opinion on where the various taxation and spending levels should be in various categories, could stand as a clear rebuke or endorsement of government or party policy.

Clearly and formally delineated public opinion could put an end to the daily misrepresentation of the peoples actual wishes by politicians and media alike and better hold them to account.

638. AAI 07

Comment #84463 by phil rimmer on November 2, 2007 at 5:07 am

Scooter

Your question is to assume that I'm not having fun.

Not in the least. I rather had in mind a discussion about life choices, possibly discussing whether aspiring to a "dream job" with a high risk of failing is socially irresponsible. In short, whether a more aspirational workforce, brought about by the lower risk of failure in a more safety-netted society, might pay societal dividends?

The nice dichotmy to be made here is that a "good" job that pays well and gives you the largest personal safety net is to be contrasted with the "dream" job that may not guarantee an ideal personal safety net but gets you springing out of bed in the morning.

639. AAI 07

Comment #84311 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 5:44 pm

Scooter, may I try another tack?

Do you love your job? If you could re-train might you change? Whats the risk of trying for something better? Something more fun?

640. Religion is not incompatible with Science: 'Non-Overlapping Magisteria'

Comment #84212 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 12:30 pm

Miracles overlap.

641. Atheism is a religion and you're as bad as the fundamentalists

Comment #84209 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 12:26 pm

No one was ever born religious...

642. AAI 07

Comment #84195 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 12:01 pm

Scooter

Is there anyway in which we can help the kids and still hold their delinquent parents to account?

643. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #84179 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 11:32 am

If Professor Chris Heard is reading, or someone knows how to contact him, it would be great to get his view on this article.

I wouldn't expect him to come to such a vehement conclusion, but he could certainly comment on any errors in Edmund Standing's arguments, if they exist.

Having said that, endorsement would be lovely.

644. AAI 07

Comment #84135 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 9:02 am

scooter

Better to show them how to fashion one themselves and allow them the respect of thinking they can rather than insulting them by just giving them the pole.

Great answer. Giving them EDUCATION is the best way of helping people. It helps them help themselves. And this is one of your main theses here isn't it? It feels great to be in control of your own life. And you are more likely to solve your own problems in future, if you have had success in solving previous problems.

Now this gift of education you've just given in the example above, does it come from taxes or from private charitable giving? I guess you'll approve of the latter, but if ALL tax dollars used to help the needy were guaranteed to have a substantial element of education for self-empowerment would that help matters for you?

645. AAI 07

Comment #84069 by phil rimmer on November 1, 2007 at 5:34 am

scooter

I can't believe I finally have to say this, but teach a person to fish, stop giving the fish....

...and give them a fishing rod/pole.

646. AAI 07

Comment #83930 by phil rimmer on October 31, 2007 at 5:08 pm

Steve,

I don't think they are. At least, I've come across a number of Libertarian atheists before. Goodness, the Mother of [EDIT] Objectivism was an atheist herself and saw it as an essential conclusion that all should come to.

They're both pretty much toeing the Libertarian line.

[EDIT due to writing bollocks. Tired]

647. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #83926 by phil rimmer on October 31, 2007 at 5:00 pm

Delicious article.

Edmund Standing holds a BA in Theology & Religious Studies and an MA in Critical & Cultural Theory

At least his education moved on to some more useful areas. We owe him for his earlier sacrifice.

648. AAI 07

Comment #83916 by phil rimmer on October 31, 2007 at 4:18 pm

Brian

Easy peasy. Tax the arse of earnings...

Exactly. Taxation is a legitimate lever given to government. In seeking to curb CEO rewards you make capitalists wary of people wading in to right wrongs within the business community, and breaking things in an effort to fix them.

If you want to curb excess wealth Tax. If you want to curb CEO rewards (and there are abuses of shareholder interests) there are some great ways of enhancing accountability that none but charlatans should complain of.

Social engineering is not ignoble, but until we have a clear consensus of what needs to be achieved at an individual and societal level we can't begin to discuss the fine details of capitalism or the welfare state. [EDIT] like I've just done.....sorry

649. AAI 07

Comment #83908 by phil rimmer on October 31, 2007 at 3:51 pm

Nice (emotional!) post VHD.

Rand's most glaring error is the tabula rasa view of the human mind. She would have loved Mr Spock from Star Trek.

Anyone prepared to take a pop at my second question about fearfulness?

1) How does society get to make the most of its human resources?
2) How does the relative happiness or fearfulness of a population affect the result?

Can I suggest that we try not to get into specific examples before trying to delineate a bit of philosophy? Things seem to deteriorate rapidly after specific examples are posted as argument.

So, a happy population seems a good idea, but does it lead to greater average prosperity? Does it lead to reduced ambition and lower national competitiveness? Would that be a good trade-off? Is it an ambition appropriate for governments? What about its converse, fearfulness?

Brian?
Notsobad?
Anyone?

650. AAI 07

Comment #83784 by phil rimmer on October 31, 2007 at 9:13 am

The bottom line is we decide what the scale of CEO earnings should be, taxation and labour laws, and we commission the relevant legislation to make that happen.

Careful! The CEO earnings thing cannot reasonably be legislated directly. Capitalist activity better decides a value for things. Is the issue not about ground rules of accountability to shareholders?