Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Richard Morgan


651. Richard Dawkins on The Late Edition with Marcus Brigstocke

Comment #109836 by Richard Morgan on January 9, 2008 at 10:11 pm

...the vast majority of religious people who are more like Jerry Falwell and Ted Haggard...

No comment.

652. US 'doomed' if creationist president elected: scientists

Comment #109658 by Richard Morgan on January 9, 2008 at 12:22 pm

I was scrolling down this page, and I picked up creationist president, orang-utan, Julius Caesar, unfuck the situation and toilet paper, and realised it was time I intervened.
Then again, WTF....

653. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #109638 by Richard Morgan on January 9, 2008 at 10:41 am

al-rwandi :

I have a mind bender... and if English IS his first language?

Then evolution is only a theory.
Or...

At last, an example of reverse evolution.
Or...

654. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #109573 by Richard Morgan on January 9, 2008 at 7:53 am

annabanana :

Can I be the grammar police?

Has it not occurred to anybody else here that probably wooter is writing his comments in his native tongue (probably Third period Transitional Sumerian with chorizo to go) then passing it through a translator like Google or somesuch?

On the internet I communicate in French, English, Portuguese and Italian.
But I don't speak Italian. On a one to one basis with short precise messages, the Google translator is just fine - as long as you pay attention.
Last month an Italian singer told me that (without being pregnant!) "I am childbirth at the beginning of December!"
At least that's what Google gave me.
Then I realised she was telling me that she was leaving (for Rio) at the beginning of December.
There is a super prize for the person who can discover the Italian verb that gave Google such a hard time!

655. Changing my Mind

Comment #108541 by Richard Morgan on January 7, 2008 at 6:55 am

flying goose:

My question is what was the cure? My belief in the the man of science as opposed to my disbelief in the quack?

The placebo effect works at a much deeper level than a simple "I believe in it" - "I don't believe in it."
Just as suggestibility works at an insidiously deep level of the mind.
Years ago, my GP darn near forbade me to read the notices that accompany medicaments. The reason? I am so shriekingly suggestible that if I read the list of "undesirable side-effects" I tend to get most of them. On reading them, I don't actually, consciously believe them, but when the idea has been planted in my unprotected little mind I can get palpitations, rashes, nausea, dizziness, muscle spasms, tachycardia, and out-of-character bouts of being nice to people.
We can discuss the psychology of the placebo effect, if you wish, and if we did so we wouldn't be all that far away from discussing religious belief structures, but before I do so, I'll wait to be invited.... or not.

656. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108498 by Richard Morgan on January 7, 2008 at 4:37 am

Paula Kirby :

...becoming an atheist may expose them to the real disapproval of - or even rejection by - friends, family, employers. That's not an easy choice to make.

I am wondering to what extent it is a choice to become an atheist. To what extent do we decide to believe or not?
If what you're saying here is how one handles one's discovery of the non-existence of god(s), yes, that can be a very delicate and painful business for many people.
For handling family problems caused by beliefs, there is an excellent precedent, of course:

Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household." (Matthew 10:34-36 NASB)
Perhaps we can take comfort in that.
No?
Well, it was just a thought while thinking...

657. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #108493 by Richard Morgan on January 7, 2008 at 4:22 am

wooter :

I admire myself and Thank God my ears are [not] located at the back of head but in the best place protected by my eyebrows

That must be worth a photo! Go on, wooter, show us what you really look like!
Talking about perfect bodies (with no reference whatsoever to my beloved Brazilian beaches) if you haven't read the article "Why We Believe in a Designer!" you should do so immediately.


http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/4/part2.html


EDIT : Paula - I've just finished a plateful of perfectly designed prawns. Yummy.

658. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #108491 by Richard Morgan on January 7, 2008 at 4:13 am

I must be missing something important here. Why on earth do people bother replying to wooter? Since so many of you seem to think it is worthwhile engaging a dialogue with this retard, I'd like to know how and where I can join in. He just vomits predictable rubbish and yet people persist in thinking that anything useful can come out of his mouth.

"Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?"
Can any good thing come out of wooter?

659. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108285 by Richard Morgan on January 6, 2008 at 11:55 am

Robotaholic :

Paula Kirby - I think you should debate Denesh D'souza - you'd have him begging you to stop! lol-

How can I not get all Freudian about comments like this?
\o/

660. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108256 by Richard Morgan on January 6, 2008 at 10:35 am

ADH

"I'll stick with Cthulhu, thanks, he's much more comforting."

Best of luck to you

He's improving, don't you think?
He could have said, "I'll pray for you," but he chose random luck.
If it works, you'll let us know, I hope. (Since prayer, apparently doesn't work.)

661. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108251 by Richard Morgan on January 6, 2008 at 10:14 am

upsidedawn:
Since the smart guys in this discussion haven't bothered answering your question, let me attempt to do so.
Apparently it is not PC here to be "Freudian". But since Freud's ideas have radically changed our perceptions of so many things concerning the mind, relationships and my ex-wife, and since we live in a society whose Zeitgeist has been touched by Freudian grace, I suppose we can take a leaf out of RD book : you are allowed to say "a cultural Christian" and "a cultural Freudian."
But, for heaven's sake, don't let anybody here catch you seeming to actually believe in the eternal soul or the subconscious, demon possession or repressed homosexuality.
Or verily, the Rational Thinkers will shit upon you from a great height. And there will be weeping and wailing, and gnashing of teeth in UpsidesawnLand, yea even unto the seventy-seventh randomly mutated generation.

662. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108238 by Richard Morgan on January 6, 2008 at 9:48 am

ADH :

As for God permitting rape and murder, you say that a benevolent God would stop it. How?

You mean - he doesn't know?
If your suffering, and the suffering of YOUR loved ones is made more tolerable (les painful?) by your beliefs, well, more power to yer elbow, mate.
Just out of interest, are you actually capable of saying anything at all that doesn't sound like it's been produced by InstantSermon 2.0? Who do you think you are fooling with your nauseating, feel-good phrases? Aren't you ashamed of masturbating in public like that?

663. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108224 by Richard Morgan on January 6, 2008 at 9:19 am

ADH

I believe that suffering does not only give us great art. I believe that it can also be redemptive.
I agree.
As long as it's your suffering, and not mine.
Let me see you undergo the torture of a terminal cancer, produce great art and get redeemed.
Without morphine, of course.
That would be fun.
The first, and absolutely crucial step is surrender, or submission if you prefer.
Sorry, but I can only click on "Preview" or "Submit"; where do I click on "Surrender"?

664. Researchers use neuroimaging to study ESP

Comment #108090 by Richard Morgan on January 6, 2008 at 2:53 am

The first thing I want to say is that I remain sceptical of all things paranormal. But I'd be interested to hear opinions on the following anecdote.

As soon as I read this article, I predicted we'd get a spate of this kind of thing. Reminds me somewhat of a phenomenon that RD calls, very scathingly, "I'm an atheist,but..."
Also, a bit of pedantry, since many of you here, like me, appreciate it : why would you call "EXTRA-sensory perception" a "sense", since the prefix "extra" expresses a notion of "outside of" or "beyond", rather than "more of" as in "an extra helping of primaeval soup."
Once you have perceived, or sensed something, the means employed are, by definition, no long "extra-sensory".

665. Sam Harris debate with Rabbi David Wolpe

Comment #108040 by Richard Morgan on January 5, 2008 at 10:04 pm

eXcommunicate :

That's where I jump in and say, hey wait a minute, is the Bible timeless or not?

The Mormons have gotten round this problem by having a living prophet in direct contact with God, so he is up-dated in real-time according to the circumstances.
If you want to be cruel to Mormon missionaries who are going on about their living prophet, constant revelation from God and whatnot, first get them affirm that their Prophet really does receive revelations from God, then ask them what the last revelation was, "because if it's from God, then I really need to know about it."
The last couple of times I did this, it was almost embarrassing, because the missionaries didn't actually know what the most recent revelation was. (Like it's only a divine revelation, for crissake, why should humble missionaries need to bother about stuff like that?)

666. The battle of the butterflies and the ants

Comment #108036 by Richard Morgan on January 5, 2008 at 9:41 pm

Getting this chemistry right is important: if an ant doesn't recognize a caterpillar as one of its own it will eat it.
This is wonderful stuff! "If it doesn't call you "Daddy" then it's lunch."
"Eat it or rear it. What an agonising decision."
Just goes to prove that God has an awfully macabre sense of humour.

667. Six Reasons to be an Atheist

Comment #108034 by Richard Morgan on January 5, 2008 at 9:33 pm

I read this book (in French) a few months back. It was a very disappointing read. Absolutely NOT in the same league as Michel ONFRAY, whose "Atheist Manifesto" is a "must-read".

668. Sadly, an Honest Creationist

Comment #107558 by Richard Morgan on January 4, 2008 at 6:35 pm

diacanu:

so I can climb into a tub and saw my head off.

With Occam's Razor, I presume.
Make that a tub for two.
Or a mass-suicide jacuzzi.
Can a person die from over-exposure to irreducible complexity?

669. Sadly, an Honest Creationist

Comment #107163 by Richard Morgan on January 4, 2008 at 8:22 am

Steve Zara :

A more noble response from the narrator would be:

"I know she is a liar, but I love her anyway".

But of course, that is exactly what he IS saying, but in a more literary style.

Diacanu:
Call me greedy, but I want love AND truth.
Me too, Greedy. But bigamy is forbidden by French law.

670. Sadly, an Honest Creationist

Comment #107148 by Richard Morgan on January 4, 2008 at 7:38 am

I am reading The Moor's Last Sigh by Salman Rushdie.
At a certain point in the narrator's life, his mother, jealous of his lover, hires a private detective in order to prove that the lover has been telling him a string of lies about her past.
When confronted with the proof that the woman of his life is a compulsive (and probably schizophrenic) liar, he does not stop being in love with her.
The reason?
"My heart cannot believe (she is a liar)."
And then : "What counted the most - love or truth?"
I haven't finished the book yet, but on reading this last passage I was reminded of the "Honest Creationist." Does choosing the "truth" recognised by the heart rather than objective truth make a person honest?
"Love is blind. Marriage restores sight."
I sometimes wonder in what kind of circumstances I myself might be compelled to prefer a truth of the heart rather than reason.
I am fairly confident that if one day I choose to follow my heart rather than my head, I will not start flying planes into skyscrapers.
But all this makes me think about the strategy "the winning of hearts and minds."
Here at RD Net, it is the mind the rules. And that is the way it should be.
But - "Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point."

671. Sadly, an Honest Creationist

Comment #106922 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 5:24 pm

PlagioClase

How objectively scientific is it to deny a designer because of one's prior beliefs about God?

This sentence reminds me of another discussion here: what can happen to someone's mind when they give up masturbating without medical supervision.

672. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106889 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 4:32 pm

al-rawandi:

I was getting a little rotund from too much beer a few months ago.
I'm glad that finally someone has decided to raise the intellectual level of the discussion here.
there is nothing about natural selection that suggests our optimal design.
Oh, shit, somebody else who has met my ex-wife...

673. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106770 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 12:42 pm

al-rawandi

Is that a picture of your ex-wife's a** that keeps flashing alternately with the Brazilian flag?
So you've recognised her as well? Bravo!

674. Mother Nature is Not Our Friend

Comment #106754 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 12:06 pm

jeepyjay:

I take the view that humans are part of nature.
I guess you've never met my ex-wife...

675. The OUT Campaign has its own Flea!

Comment #106748 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 11:49 am

that we may trust in God as He brings Scripture to our remembrance in the time of temptation.

And my brother Esau is an hairy man, but I am a smooth man. You mean scriptures like that?

676. Changing my Mind

Comment #106742 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 11:38 am

upside dawn :

I became fascinated by the entymology on Merriam-Webster online...

Some spelling mistakes are, well, just, er, priceless!

677. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #106615 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 7:48 am

Affront :

The question which currently interests me is, given the ,my last point and the strength of cognitive dissonance/closure, why do we atheists even exist? Why don't we all use strategies based on cognitive dissonance/closure to provide easy answers and, therefore, live happier lives?

As is often the case, the answer is in the question - we atheists weren't "happy" with the fairy-tale happy-endings/answers. The feel-good principle didn't work with us. Our brains misfired into rational thought.
Darn it!

678. Changing my Mind

Comment #106565 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 6:41 am

Roger Stanyard :

The very meaning of the word...

Tut, tut, Rodge, are we forgetting our Wittgenstein? "Words don't have 'meanings', they have uses."
That's my share of Morganic pedantry for the day. Now I can get back to being generally unpleasant, which will be a relief to the many hundreds amongst you who were beginning to feel ignored.

679. Changing my Mind

Comment #106559 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 6:30 am

Steve Zara :

Saying I am an atheist is not enough for me. It does not say why I don't believe, and why I would like to promote rationality.

You know, sometimes I'm almost envious of you guys who live in countries where being an atheist makes a difference!
You all know what a cantankerous ol' geezer I am, but where I live (Toulouse, France) nobody gives a monkey's winkle whether you're atheist, Calvinist or relapsed catholic. (Though having an English accent can raise a few disapproving Gallic eyebrows.) So I have to irritate people on other, less urgent, matters, like genetically modified Union leaders, or the effect on global warming of eating too much cassoulet (mostly fart-producing beans, like Brazilian feijoada)
You know, I honestly do believe that in the last analysis, the best way to promote rationality is to simply be rational. (Perhaps being handsome, sexy, rich AND rational could make a greater difference, but it's never helped me.)
I try, only try, to have this attitude with the deluded of this world:
He drew a circle that cut me out,
Heretic! Rebel! A thing to flout!
But Love and I had the wit to win,
We drew a circle that took him in.
If being rational, and showing compassionate love doesn't work,
I generally piss on them.


EDIT : Talking about flatulence (this is not off-topic) there is a French verb péter which means "to fart", and a very ordinary, common-or-garden noun pétard which is a small "banger" (the fireworks variety, not pork or beef) or Chinese "cracker".

680. Changing my Mind

Comment #106549 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 6:08 am

Grumpy Max

But I don't know what you mean by "to thine own self be true"- I suspect you mean "follow your heart" or something similar, albeit less trite than the phrase I chose. I think this is a popular misreading.
There. Pedantry over. Sorry it was off-topic, and I welcome any correction.

"Sorry?"
"Love means never having to say 'Sorry'. (Film "Love Story")
"Sorry seems to be the hardest word...." Elton John.
"Love means having to say "Sorry" every fifteen minutes" - John Lennon.
Seriously, accuracy is not pedantry and I very much appreciate your correction. I have re-edited my comment as a result.

681. Changing my Mind

Comment #106441 by Richard Morgan on January 3, 2008 at 12:40 am

Some of you seem interested in techniques for dealing with JayDubs and Mormons who come cold-calling. This is certainly an appropriate thread for discussing this issue, because those guys are on your doorstep with the intention of changing your mind.
I find it hard to believe that there is any virtue in politely criticising their proselyting techniques. From 1972 to 1974 I was a Mormon missionary in France! (Yeah, I know... but I could make even more horrendous confessions about my past, but I'll save them for another discussion...)
For these mind changers the slight unpleasantness of disturbing honest folk by ringing their door-bell is nothing compared to the importance of their message. It reminds me of the old marriage guidance counsellor's advice - "Never shout at your wife, unless the house is on fire."
As "new" atheists, our business is about Zeitgeist"changing, not JayDub-bashing.
Here are some suggestions for helping to change the Zeitgeist:
1. Write a best-selling book about atheism.
2.SELL (or, in extreme cases, give away) best-selling books about atheism.
3.Make lots of babies and educate them in a reasonable way.
4.Never vote for anyone who has never heard of Paula Kirby or Richard Dawkins.
5.EDITED:Know thyself..
6.NEVER give door-to-door evangelizers the impression that they have anything interesting to say, and NEVER invite them in. (Don't forget - they've got God on their side, so they ain't bothered by your rebuttals or your atheistic reasonableness and/or politeness.)
7. Avoid discussing religion with theists if you have bad breath. (Think about it. There might be a whole new market out there for Breath-Fresheners for Atheists)
Education is the key.
And, as Paula has suggested, for new outers perhaps we have a human responsibility toward them in the After-Sales Service department.
EDIT : I have just hung out the washing to dry. In my family everybody has an even number of feet. Every time I hang out the washing, there is an odd number of socks. So, fellow atheists, let us remain humble : science can't explain everything.

682. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #106327 by Richard Morgan on January 2, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Affront :

So as I say, I think this is about more than just feelings, it's to do with how our brains function as a whole.

I most certainly agree.
I was about to post this remark when I read your comment :
Believing in invisible gods is what brains do.
And "feelings" have a an awful lot to do with handling cognitive dissonance.
My brain has evolved in a way that makes it easier for me to accept the hope of eternal salvation rather than the finality of death.
I know that the Earth is in orbit around the Sun, but for practical every-day purposes, I still "feel" happy with notions like sun-rise, and sun-set, even "the sun has come out from behind the clouds".
The Sun has put his hat on.....? No, I'll draw the line at that. ;-)

683. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105991 by Richard Morgan on January 2, 2008 at 9:01 am

Paula Kirby :

So here I am. Atheist. And angelic. Allegedly.

Evidence, please.

684. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105990 by Richard Morgan on January 2, 2008 at 8:59 am

AtheistJon I don't know how anybody could be not nice to you.

Ah, the joys of internet...
(But if you need lessons in not being nice to angels, I'm your man!)

685. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105731 by Richard Morgan on January 1, 2008 at 5:13 pm

EvolvedDNA : I stopped to lend a hand in Aberfan in 1966, since I was passing though at the time. What a nightmare.(My mother's family comes from Merthyr Tydfil). Alas, at the time, I did not have your intelligence to see what was really going on.
Thank you for your comment. It only took me an extra thirty years to understand the reality of Aberfan, human suffering and life itself.

686. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105729 by Richard Morgan on January 1, 2008 at 5:05 pm

AtheistJon : I appreciate the clarity of your thoughts.
You quote Sagan as saying that he didn't think with his gut.
Probably true for scientific matters, or anything that needs to be approached by reasoning.
You know, I don't really mind what religious extremists think. I couldn't care less about their private fantasies. Consenting adults and all that stuff.
What does matter to me is the transition from thought to action. I have noticed that for most so-called "believers", their religious beliefs don't interfere much with their day-to-day behaviour.
I'm sure you wouldn't really mind all that much if I fantasised about having an endless supply of charming virgins after my death, but you would object to my flying a Boeing into a sky-scraper in order to obtain those virgins as a reward.
My point here is that what I actually do is often the result of my thinking with my head and/or my gut. Sure, my intellectual reasoned thoughts can be changed according to the data available. But since religious beliefs are more (uniquely?) rooted in gut (emotional)processes than rational processes, many people can not be reasoned out of their beliefs.
As I have said before elsewhere, the ultimate answer to The God Delusion will be education. Education based on reason, of course. When religious ideas are presented to a reasonable mind, without all the emotional over-tones of family, tradition etc, I think our sky-scrapers and throats will probably be a lot safer.


(Paula - HELP! I'm not expressing this very clearly. Could you translate for me please?)

687. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105701 by Richard Morgan on January 1, 2008 at 3:32 pm

Change your mind?
Change of heart?
My wife still loves me even after having found out what I'm really like inside. Thank heavens for that! Well, in this context, at least.
Inasmuch as religious beliefs (and love) are much more an affair of the heart than the mind, reason alone will not be enough to stop a person clinging to his irrational beliefs (or my wife clinging to me).
I would like to know how many new atheists among us actually had to give up a deeply held "belief" in order to follow the voice of reason. I used to think I was a believer, but discovering I was in fact an atheist seemed more like a realisation of the obvious than a radical change of mind.
What about you?

688. What have you changed your mind about? Why?

Comment #105605 by Richard Morgan on January 1, 2008 at 7:47 am

Happy new year to everyone and their uncle.
Special thanks and appreciation to Paula Kirby
(who, for me, has been the
Voice of reason in 2007),
Véronique,
BAEZ,
Dr Benway,
Steve Zara
and AllanW.
You have all helped me change my mind about many things.
I thank you most sincerely.

689. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

Comment #105535 by Richard Morgan on December 31, 2007 at 10:46 pm

Paula Kirby :

Religion: tackling 21st century challenges with Iron Age solutions.


Energy-saving tip N°1: get religion and eliminate the need to use brain-power to think.

690. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #105078 by Richard Morgan on December 30, 2007 at 2:10 pm

You must believe in free will; there is no choice.

- Isaac Bashevis Singer

691. Could there be a Darwinian Account of Human Creativity?

Comment #104961 by Richard Morgan on December 30, 2007 at 7:05 am

In 1972 Dr Anthony Storr published a book that I found totally fascinating, but which horrified many of my "artistic" friends : "The Dynamics of Creation." Using words like introversion", "neurosis" and "psychopathology" he tries to explain in a very rational way what Leonardo da Vinci had already said centuries before : "All great art is born of inner conflict."
The shock-horror reaction of many creative artists was mainly due to a natural aversion to anything that resembles reductionism : "It's only chemicals in the brain that make you feel passionately in love" etc.
The human race has lived for so long with the need for awe and mystery that we feel we are being robbed of something precious when a simple explanation seems to explain away something important. (The "God" notion is very handy here, of course.)
I sense that one of our problems could resemble something which we criticise the Fundies for - they see God in everything, from the creation of the universe to the weather forecast.
We seek, and generally find, evolutionary explanations for nearly everything. Well, for guys like Dawkins and Dennett, you could say that's their job. But inasmuch as natural selection is only concerned with the survival of the species (favouring the ability to attain reproductive status) rather than the quality there's a whole pile of stuff going on that neither helps nor hinders the evolutionary processes.
Being able to give birth is very useful for the survival of a species, but giving birth painfully is neither here nor there.
(Sorry, my Fundy friends, I'd almost forgotten that God had cursed Eve :I will greatly increase your pains in childbirth; in pain you will bear children.)
Do we really need to find evolutionary advantages in all artistic creativity? I think not.
Dennett provides us with some elegant reasoning which could explain the mechanisms used in artistic creation, and that is all fascinating stuff..
I was equally fascinated the first time I read Freud's 23rd Introductory Lecture on Psychoanalysis:

An artist is once more in rudiments an introvert, not far removed from neurosis. He is oppressed by excessively powerful instinctual needs. he desires to win honour, power, wealth, fame and the love of women, but he lacks the means for achieving these satisfactions. Consequently, like any other unsatisfied man, he turns away from reality, and transfers all his interest, and his libido too, to the wishful constructions of his life of phantasy, whence the path might lead to neurosis.

Art, like shit, happens. It's what human beings do. Natural selection provides the tools but not necessarily the raisons d'être
Waddya think?

692. Pope's exorcist squads will wage war on Satan

Comment #104891 by Richard Morgan on December 29, 2007 at 10:39 pm

"Under the law, practitioners must have piety, knowledge, prudence, and integrity of life."

So it takes at least four different people at the same time to carry out one exorcism?

693. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104140 by Richard Morgan on December 28, 2007 at 1:46 am

"You don't have enough faith!"
"You're not praying enough!"
"You haven't truly repented!"
"You should study the scriptures more!"
"You need to get baptised in the spirit!"
How many times have I heard those explanations given to people who haven't received the blessings they were promised.
This is indeed one of the more disgusting aspects of American-style christianity. The Mormons do it in a tidier fashion - give ten per cent of your income to the Church and God will "open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it" (Malachi 3:8-10). But don't hold your breath.
I read about these religious crooks and frauds, and ask myself, "Why am I not surprised?"
(If you want to make a fast buck, you could always write a book attacking the "new atheists". But you'd better move fast before the market gets saturated.
"The fool hath said in his heart : There is no god." The completely deluded say out loud that there is one. The shrewd man writes best-selling books about it.)

694. 'Atheistic fundamentalism' fears

Comment #104055 by Richard Morgan on December 27, 2007 at 5:40 pm

robotaholic:

I appreciate your concise locutions, but the snideness is irking.

Oops - be careful about cultural differences. Don't forget that the USA and the UK are two countries separated by a common language.
Paula Kirby is NEVER snide.
I think I have a virtual monopoly on snideness on this site. (Altho' I admit that many of you beat me in silliness.)

695. The Pagan Christ

Comment #103863 by Richard Morgan on December 27, 2007 at 6:31 am

kirisking :

How can we be sure that we believe what we believe?

Although this is a fundamentally silly non-question, being a fundamentally silly, non-person myself, I'd like to suggest an answer.
I long ago learned that if you want to know about a person's belief structures, one of the least reliable methods is to ask them, "What do you believe?"
The most reliable method is to simply observe them. Watch them living for, say, six, months. The you'll have a pretty good idea about their basic belief structures.
That's the luxury of believing in God -for most people, you can declare a belief without having to do anything about it.
That is also why "theology" is as interesting and useful as astrology - you can talk about it endlessly ( a sort of intellectual masturbation) without letting it affect your daily behaviour in any way whatsoever.
You can worry for weeks over the "Johanine comma" but it won't stop you needing to go for a crap from time to time, paying taxes, getting irritable with those close to you, or putting petrol in your car to make it work.
I "believe" that if I click on
Submit

then this message will get posted.
And here's the proof!

696. Man and God

Comment #103463 by Richard Morgan on December 25, 2007 at 6:00 pm

Radesq :

But I don't see any certainty that Abrahamic religions will be replaced anytime soon or that they will necessarily be replaced by reason and the scientific method.

Perhaps you're right on this one. Or perhaps the change is happening with an evolution-like slowness.
As to what will replace the monotheistic religions, I'm not going to try to guess on that one - human beings will be human beings for a long time yet, I imagine.
But the neurosciences are largely replacing exorcisms, the work of Pasteur went a long way to dispelling the myth of divine curses, the solar system has stayed heliocentric...
These are not proofs, but encouraging indicators, I feel.
Dawkin's beloved Zeitgeist is on the move - quite perceptibly if you consider the last fifty years or so.
Let us never forget that editorial commentaries have the same raison d'être as everything else in a newspaper - selling newspapers. And with a title like "Man and God", you are likely to attract the attention of theists and atheists - which instantly doubles the potential readership.
I can understand your pessimism, but there are hopeful signs - I believe.

697. Man and God

Comment #103444 by Richard Morgan on December 25, 2007 at 4:38 pm

Just a reminder:

256. Atheist banned from committee on religious education

Comment #27809 by Richard Morgan on March 26, 2007 at 9:47 pm

#27790 by justme : When you say

Finally, using real names opens up the chance that stalkers, abusive individuals, or even job discrimination can occur. This is a real personal concern to me since I have to go through security clearances on a regular basis, and the people doing those reviews may not live up to the ideals of the profession when they do my review. It only takes one, and it is very hard to protest a bad or rejected investigation


...All I can reply is :
OK, Jack, I can appreciate, understand and respect that.
Excuse me for shooting my mouth off like that, but, living in a country where one's being an atheist is of no interest to anyone, I do tend to forget that this is not the case elsewhere.
Clearly, the fact that you need to conceal your identity in this way is a very powerful argument for the need for books like TGD!

698. Man and God

Comment #103442 by Richard Morgan on December 25, 2007 at 4:31 pm

Faith admits to both doubt and unknowingness. It is not a provable dimension. But it is one of extraordinary power and potential.

The faith-heads loving saying things like that, as if saying the words made them true. But has anyone ever shown us an example of "power and potential" that is exclusive to religion?
It would deny as unscientific the spiritual dimension that is as truly Darwinian in its evolution and persistence as patterns of behaviour or genetics.

This is beautifully silly. But why doesn't the writer go all the way? The principles of evolution concern species, not individuals, and no species is destined to exist for ever. Not even Man. United supporters.
Sure, very non-random mutations are trying to help religion adapt to new environments, but it is clear we are witnessing the death-throes of the species called "religion".

699. 'Christian God is not to blame'

Comment #103042 by Richard Morgan on December 24, 2007 at 8:44 am

"Christian God is not to blame"
Absolutely correct.
I'm fed up of getting the blame for everything.

Merry Memas everybody!
Joyeux Noël!

700. 'Christian God is not to blame'

Comment #102949 by Richard Morgan on December 24, 2007 at 3:08 am

Paula Kirby

I just can't think of any good reason for me to hide behind an alias and I'm increasingly coming to the view that we atheists need to stand up and be counted.

YAY!
But do you remember the reactions I got when I started saying something similar here a few months back?
At the same time, my sympathy and total support for those who clearly dare not reveal their true identity. Their fear is one of our "raisons d'être".

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 | Next