751. Unintelligent Design

Comment #39977 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 1:28 pm

hasty toweling wrote, Scot Atran belongs to what Dawkins calls the "know-it-all" school of religious apologetics.
______

Moderate British Vicars who may not even believe in what they preach still want to keep their satisfying jobs. The sincere ones actually psychologically need to keep justifying the investment of their time and efforts spent on polishing on what they consider to be authentic job 'skills' and effective work.

I see the same motivation in writers/researchers like Atran. He has made his name in acquiring/interpreting information about different cultures/religions. His type is what I called the supposed 'missing link'--or so he would like to regard himself--between secular and religious viewpoints as if such opposing viewpoints could ever be reconciled. All I see is the same that I see in a squirming Vicar, someone who wants very much to continue to do work that he has done for a long time with which he is very personally identified and is perturbed by seeing his work made meaningless.

Atran comes across as a crystal ball reader who has covered his psychic tool with a dusty and familiar old cloth of his experience and knowledge gleaned from time spent 'in the field'. Whip away that protective cloth, and what do you see--a crystal ball.

752. Kirk Cameron Proves That God Exists

Comment #39972 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 12:37 pm

mewton wrote, I think it's great that the RRS is advertising at tiger beat, we need to get information to people while they are still young enough to have an open mind."
_______

As Sapient has said, the 'tiger beat' generation is being targeted already by the Christians. I say the present situation is more like teenagers being a captive audience for the Christians. RRS is clever in using the Net to reach this captive audience.

MarkSmith wrote, Once again, hurray (f)or citizen debates.
________

Thanks for that descriptive term, citizen debates. I couldn't jog my memory to come up with what constitutes the merit of this style of 'amateurish' debating.

753. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #39958 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 11:41 am

A superbly written article. Duly bookmarked. It is a long article and will take a bit of time to read, but every minute is well spent. Though lengthy, it is still incredibly concise considering the amount of information contained within this article. A true pleasure to read from the title to the last word. Kudos, Jerry Coyne!

754. The meaning of freedom

Comment #39862 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 6:01 am

Yet again, religious beliefs are sowing division.

755. Kirk Cameron Proves That God Exists

Comment #39858 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 5:50 am

firemancarl, thanks for the clarification.

756. Dawkins transcendent

Comment #39857 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 5:43 am

As Russell Blackford mentioned on another thread, Ms Gledhill would be a nice person to have a conversation with. And I certainly hope Ms Gledhill had a chance of reading Blackford's limerick addressed to her.

Moderates who are familiar with a range of religious beliefs as Ms Gledhill is, are often gracious, making conversations pleasant and enjoyable but hardly ever fruitful. They have this uncanny protean ability to adjust an atheist's viewpoint to fit into their religious framework. Though a protean ability could be praised for its flexibility, again, the nifty little saying, "Don't have such an open mind, that your brains fall out" comes to mind.

RD is enamoured with and enthralled by nature, not the supernatural. Never has he ever given the slightest indication that he is interested in the supernatural. One can be flexible, but also consistent.

757. Dawkins transcendent

Comment #39853 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 5:23 am

stuartM02 wrote, if she writes a 3rd one, I'll bet RD will become a Christian.
_____

On the 4th article, RD will convert from Christianity to Islam.

758. Kirk Cameron Proves That God Exists

Comment #39850 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 5:20 am

Apparently both Ray and Kirk prayed during the debate. Perhaps that was the reason why Kirk had to have Bashir repeat a question for him.

Why didn't I use that excuse when I was caught daydreaming during my Catholic schooling? I could have replied to the irate nuns, "I was only praying, my dears, keep your habits on, for goodness sakes."

759. Kirk Cameron Proves That God Exists

Comment #39846 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 5:14 am

firemancarl, Where do you get that this author thinks Cameron won? My take is this very snarky review of the event is implying that the god squad fell flat on their deluded faces.

The author's sarcasm is clearly stated in the last sentence of the first paragraph:

If He does exist and is just, it will be the last.(implying to debates between theists and atheists)

760. Kirk Cameron Proves That God Exists

Comment #39833 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 4:27 am

pretty decent review, however snarky.

761. Abstain With Me

Comment #39832 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 4:22 am

Abstinence sex education is like hold-it potty training

Brilliant presentation. Tears of laughter are still rolling down my face.

This style is reminiscent of the great rock 'n' roll tear-jerker ballads replete with a falsetto/high pitched male voice.

762. Ted Haggard Is Completely Heterosexual

Comment #39826 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 4:12 am

He (i.e. T. Haggard) put the men in Ah men.

Hilarious.

Roy is part of the wonderful American, folk-music tradition of protesting, like Guthrie and Lehrer.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, Russell Blackford compose a limerick about Roy.

763. Defenders of Marriage

Comment #39825 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 4:04 am

Roy reminds me both of Woody Guthrie and Tom Lehrer.

I love you, Roy! You can strum my chords anytime.

764. The Debate: Can We Live by Reason Alone?

Comment #39824 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 3:49 am

Paikin conducted a fantastic interview, the best that I have ever seen made with Dawkins. Kudos, Paikin. As for the 'smarmy' manner of Paiken's interview style, my assumption, and it is a silly one at that, but I am going to let it rip nonetheless is the following:

Perhaps my artistic ability to draw portraits has made me notice that Paikin's face is very sharp-featured. His nose could make a loaf of uncut bread shiver in fearful anticipation of getting mercilessly sliced in a second flat, while his chin could do justice to an overcooked roast beef, taming it toughness and making neat, pretty slices of it. And not to mention that his wiry hair could scour out both the bread pan and roasting dish! So if I looked like that, I would try to temper my angular features with sheepishly scrunching my shoulders, hoping that would make them look softer therefore less threatening and frequently smiling though the smiling is done in a tight, tiny, frozen way, which is the only way my impossibly narrow jaw would allow.

765. Does God Exist? The Nightline Face-Off

Comment #39811 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 2:27 am

Kelly and Brian worked very well as a team; Kirk and Ray did so less--Kirk would have been better all by himself.

Kelly looked directly at the audience when she was speaking which was very effective. I am glad Brian recognized that he needs notes to read from, in this way, he will continue to build a skill base and eventually will be able to do what the professional actor, Kirk, can do so easily--speak without written aid.

However, Kelly and Brian do need to look directly at their opponents also, and Ray called them on it, implying that they were being shifty. It is hard for humans to look at something disgusting which the Chiquita boys with their pathetic grasp of evolution and their abundant intellectual dishonesty represented in spades, but some handle on doing it has to be devised by Kelly and Brian.

As for the inadequacies of Kelly's speaking voice which someone has brought up on another thread, her less than perfect speaking voice is more than made up by the direct and plain speaking style in which she phrases her words and ideas and her very confident and elegant way of holding herself, her physical stature. Her total 'package' packs quite a punch and together with Sapient, I think they will have a rewarding, fulfilling, and effective future as debaters against theism. They also, at their own site, admitted that they made mistakes and are asking for feedback. Please take them up on that suggestion.

Bashir did OK, also.

766. Does God Exist? The Nightline Face-Off

Comment #39805 by Logicel on May 12, 2007 at 1:41 am

good point, ADParker.

It takes about a minute to register at the original website--please double post.

Brian and Kelly did a good job in blowing away the cobwebby nonsense of Kirk and Ray.

Kirk's success as a popular actor--in my book he is a very poor actor--was so wonderful that he decided that he will cling to a make-believe so he can continue to enjoy his intensely successful life for eternity which is the height of arrogance and selfishness. There is no evidence for such eternity, and yet, because of his desperate need to continue to exist ALWAYS he sacrifices his apparent intelligence so he can delude himself. Sin does not exist, but Kirk is committing a grievance against his own humanity by not accepting his mortality. Poor sod.

Kirk is a failed preacher and Ray is a failed--and flailing--actor.

767. Is Christianity Good for the World?

Comment #39179 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 6:15 am

The most sheepish, fluffiest wool that has been spun and posted on this site into an insubstantial mess of inanity has been accomplished by Alvin Plantinga. Sorry, but that's my candidate for the infamous award of Spinner of substantial amounts of brown cloth, better known and trademarked as Crapolan, and I am sticking to my guns. However, McGrath is my second candidate.

768. Is Christianity Good for the World?

Comment #39175 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 6:05 am

Wilson, in his superficial, 'cheery' manner of understanding life, appears less than consciously alive. He seems taken aback by the collision of atoms, as that fact somehow seems to degrade his humanity, instead of making it possible, so he, can then make his life into something meaningful and fulfilling.

In addition to the compulsory critical thinking course, he needs one also in human-consciousness raising.

769. Is Christianity Good for the World?

Comment #39171 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 5:53 am

Do all human societies have a grasp of basic morality, which is the theme of your first point, or has religion poisoned everything, which is the thesis of your book?
______

Huh? Yeah, Wilson, poisoning means that all the basic morality has been wiped out by religion. If Wilson can't even piece a logical question together, how can he be expected to answer anything logically? He needs to take a course in basic critical thinking.

The result of the muddled question above could be that the discussion gets veered off its tracks by putting the focus on a topic not under discussion. Is this approach by Wilson motivated by his true lack of understanding of Hitch's points, or he is being 'cute'? And I doubt either way, it will result in diffusing Hitch's focus.

770. Is Christianity Good for the World?

Comment #39162 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 5:40 am

JoeK, nice post.

771. Gene mutation linked to cognition is found only in humans

Comment #39152 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 5:18 am

chadvader123 wrote, These are the words of a man who, in the midst of great depression,...
______

Well, then that is proof that God exists. Is that why Religion works so hard to depress people, so they can believe?

772. More on the Atheism Front

Comment #39151 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 5:15 am

...,we will discuss this through the month of May if the blind concourse of atoms continue to bounce their aimless way down through corridors of time.
_____

Nice debate pairing--Hitch and Wilson. They are both verbose, but at least Hitch spices up his verbosity with interesting, stimulating, and edgy content.

773. Gene mutation linked to cognition is found only in humans

Comment #39150 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 5:09 am

The 'weak', supposedly 'scientific' theory of Evolution is just getting hammered each and every day. Sigh.

These discoveries will continue. Great article.

774. Intellectual Diversity or Intellectual Insult?

Comment #39130 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 4:15 am

CJ22, Who is Cletus and Darlene?

Thank you for your kind words. The harm that religion has done can be identified concretely via the realities of the Inquisition, Crusades, and Jihadists. However, the kind of damage which my family--like countless of others--sustained because of religious influence is unfortunately immeasurable.

775. God . . . in other words

Comment #39129 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 4:09 am

john_eg, I noticed that site adm had posted test at the top of the list of articles on the right of this site for just a second or two. They may be having some technical difficulties.

776. God . . . in other words

Comment #39123 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 3:41 am

Biz wrote, Something smells fishy to me. Is it at all possible that Dawkins is now trying to present a softer image after taking so much criticism for his attitude towards God and religion? Forgive my scepticism, but from all that I've seen of Dawkins, this interview just seems very atypical.
_______

Firstly, please take up Corylus suggesting your reading Unweaving the Rainbow.

Secondly, could it be that Religion apologists are now realizing that the 'nasty' atheists are not being silenced by being called 'nasty', and to seriously debate with them, atheists books and arguments must be politely and fully considered?

In effect, the popularity and viral--thanks to the Web--dissemination of atheism is making the once protected notion that Religion must not be criticized less followed, opening up real discussion. Dawkins is not presenting his material in any less of a harsher way, his same manner of presentation is now being regarded in a more positive light. Biz, this change in perception is even happening to you!!!

777. Brazil Greets Pope but Questions His Perspective

Comment #39117 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 3:06 am

Mind Rebel, what an astute suggestion--I have been so encouraged to keep the Pope out on the sidelines, not I forgot that keeping him marginalized from the debate is just kowtowing to the ridiculous notion that somehow religion should not be lambasted with criticism every chance we get. We should set up a website encouraging for this debate to take place even if it is to debate the cyber pope:

http://www.cyber-pope.blogspot.com/

778. Gene mutation linked to cognition is found only in humans

Comment #39112 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 2:49 am

chadvader123, wrote: Then again, maybe I'm just crazy like Pascal, Newton, Collins,
C.S Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, St. Augustine, and the scores of others who became believers.
_______

Yes, the God Delusion is a very potent but BORINGLY COMMON DELUSION. And I do hope your delusion does not go even further, encouraging the regarding of yourself in such a blinding light that since you and these luminaries share the God Delusion that you also share their talent, scientific expertise, and creativity. But having already elevated, arbitrarily--without any evidence--your human origins to something unsubstantially divinely connected, your ability to run wildly and unconstrained with your particular brand of make-believe will permit any ludicrous conclusion to be reached.

As you pray for us, we will think for you.

779. Cardinal: homosexuality a form of prostitution

Comment #39103 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 2:10 am

Gotta love this Pope--in his desperation to stem the unrelenting decline of Catholicism, he is hastening it. Keep it up, my silly old dear.

EDIT: Oops, it is a cardinal that is hastening the decline of Catholicism, ok, that's good, though I think no additional efforts are needed as the Pope is doing a fine job all by himself.

780. Intellectual Diversity or Intellectual Insult?

Comment #39101 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 1:55 am

"But faculty groups argue that the reports called for by the legislation would actually create ideological litmus tests — as college administrators would feel forced to classify professors, student groups or outside speakers as "conservative" or "liberal" in ways that oversimplify and that encourage a bipolar view of the world at a time when many people would like to encourage campus debates to be more nuanced and subtle. Further, the idea that administrators might be drawing up reports in which they rank faculty members' politics in any way sounds a little too much like the era when people were asked "are you a member or have you ever been a member..." questions."
_______

If this bill is to encourage the presentation of conservative politics, which belongs in political science/history/ethics courses, then the political science/history/ethics departments should be scrutinized not the entirety of the academic offerings. As ID is only relevant in Religion classes, so is politics only relevant in political science/history/ethics courses.

Being the cynic that I am and a very happy graduate of an University, which was a wonderful mind-opening experience for me, I would say that the impetus here is to dumb down intellectual achievement driven by the fears and disdain of close-minded/rigid supporters of religious superstitions. This is the meddling that Christians love to do--we know what is best for everyone before they can even get to information that would allow them to decide for themselves. Universities are the bane of these people, always was, and always will be.

A personal anecdote is that my mother, a devout Catholic, back in the mid 1960s, was so angered at the secular university which she blamed for her eldest daughter's deconversion to atheism, that not only did my mother disown her daughter, a brilliant physicist and musician--my eldest sister--to the end of her days, she also deprived another older sister from attending the only university she could afford, a secular, public one. That sister was very intellectually curious and not being able to further her education was a factor in her nervous breakdown and subsequent death.

781. Hamas 'Mickey Mouse' calls for Muslim domination on kids' show

Comment #39090 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 1:07 am

A spokeswoman from Walt Disney Co.'s headquarters in Burbank, Calif., did not immediately return messages asking for comment about the use of the Disney-like character.
______

That is because they are checking with their cadre of lawyers if it is feasible to sue Hamas for copyright infringement.

782. Sam Harris in conversation with Oliver McTernan

Comment #38763 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 6:02 am

I read the transcript. Since McTernan works with people of different faiths, supposedly he regards that as an edge to which Harris must defer. I was really pining to see McTernan present some useful handle on how to deal with supporters of religious superstitions coming from his experience. But alas, just the same tired saw of respecting what I deem is respectable--belief in belief with no evidence, and if you do not, then you are sowing division, and you will never reduce religious fanaticism.

783. Review of The God Delusion

Comment #38760 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 5:51 am

Russell Blackford, Thanks for the explanation of how the online article was formated regarding the odd placement of the last paragraph--sometimes I am unable to deduce the obvious.

784. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38717 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 3:11 am

MarcusA wrote, At the risk of sounding sexist - Female religious apologists seem to write the worst rubbish.
_______

The males can dish the nonsense out equally well unfortunately, and the majority of Religion apologists who have had their articles posted at this site are of the male persuasion. For me, no Religion apologist can surmount the accomplished climbing of the improbable mountain of polished inanity as Alvin Plantinga. That monumental hike done by Plantinga will ensure that all the other apologists, regardless of gender, will be sliding down said mount on their fannies, exhausted and bewildered by their less than stellar efforts.

785. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38716 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 2:56 am

RichardHarty wrote, I think if we stopped treating religion as a science and more like an art, it might prove far more useful. If we stopped using religion as the end of discussion and instead used it as creative discussion and exploration it could be a vehicle for transformation and growth. And maybe the comfort could be far more meaningful if it didn't have all the strings attached.
________

I agree, and RD certainly referred to the literary impact of holy books in TGD. The trouble is, though, like Carl Sagan's widow, Anne Druyan, I support reclaiming 'spirituality' and even a concept of a 'soul', that is, a union of the body and mind, I have been well disabused of using terminology like spirituality/soul, because as other posters have pointed out, the Religious wingnuts OWN these terms.

Religion, could be a historical art form, but at present it is not, and the supporters of religious superstitions are not willing to embrace this approach. So, we will continue to challenge their notion that belief without evidence is good, and we will continue to discover ways of presenting the embracing of reality in positive approaches. Eventually, if we succeed, religion maybe then could contribute to our mental/emotional wellness. In other words, when the practice of believing in supernatural beliefs ends and becomes history, 'Religion' can become an approach which is truly benign.

786. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38711 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 2:21 am

CloudedHills wrote, Lint from the recesses of a journalist's deadline-fearing mind.
_______

Beautifully crafted sentence. Thanks so much, my creative self adored that!

787. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38703 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 2:03 am

Harlon57 wrote, Ridiculous. This is why war is left to men, not wimps.

and

Face it. You don't have the stomach for war.

That's why it is left for serious men to execute.

No pussy's allowed.

______

Wow, a really heavyweight (ha), bullying 'stone' thrower is in our midst.

My version is:

Face it. You don't have the mind for peace.

788. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38700 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 1:56 am

Romin_Devourin wrote, You simply don't have the stones to own it, ...
_________

Being a female, and thus not owning 'stones', I suppose it is easier for me to not encourage the enforcement of ideas that have no evidence of being positive in their results, like the internment of believers of religious superstitions. Where's the evidence, bud, that such internment would make the world a better place? Happily, possessing 'stones', does not mean that all males are as dense as you.

789. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38698 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 1:52 am

Atticus_of_Amber, nice post, thanks.

790. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38573 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:27 pm

tolerance wrote, I suppose we are all foolish in some way?
______

You are very wise.

791. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38568 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:15 pm

newatheist, welcome into the fold!

And thanks for jogging my memory, right, pet ownership has the same benefits as believing in religious superstitions. Imagine one can get the same benefit but by hanging out with a REAL companion.

792. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38559 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 3:50 pm

dsquare wrote, It means that to be alive is to have a void,...
_________

Here is my version: It means that to be alive is to be alive. The more I accept that I am a highly successfully evolved primate, the happier I feel. The more I embrace reality, the more I am satisfied.

As any good evolutionist will tell you--humans are guided by emotions...passions...by the reptilian brain stem...by instincts...the neocortex is just window dressing..a butter dispensing appendage created by genes in order to effectuate their spread---
__________

What nonsense. Read some info on neuroscience. Humans are capable of both emotions and rationality--we need them both to function. Atheists are as emotional as theists, if they were not they would not be motivated to reason, without emotion we would be limp, immobile creatures.

Theists use faulty reasoning and are gullible in terms of accepting beliefs without any evidence. Theists are not capable of purer, more satisfying emotions than atheists just because they believe without proof or evidence. And atheists, just because they will not believe without evidence, are not unfeeling robots. Get a grip.

How about Choice? Fine--we can agree on Choice. Many of these people you snidely deride, then, have made the Choice. OK...and you've made yours'. Fine. Now please--shut will you?
________

No, we will not shut up. We will continue to criticize religious beliefs because they have no evidence, and therefore can lead to very dangerous outcomes. If you cannot handle criticism of your religious beliefs, then stick some cotton in your ears or stop reading criticism. Continue to believe without evidence, and we will continue to criticize your doing that--however we will not do anything else except to unrelentingly criticize the formerly pampered, protected notion that belief in belief is good. You can continue to believe without evidence to your heart's content.

793. Review of The God Delusion

Comment #38523 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 1:45 pm

Good job in summarizing what RD accomplishes very well in TGD. However, I found the last paragraph to be awkwardly placed as the ending paragraph. I even checked the original site to see if by accident the ending was not lopped off.

794. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38449 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 6:07 am

BaronOchs, I enjoyed that Whitman poem tremendously, thanks!

795. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38448 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 6:06 am

Boondoggle wrote, I would just encourage the author and others to look at both sides of the argument.
_____

And I would encourage you to recognize the fact that they have. They examined the evidence probably more thoroughly than you have and concluded rightly that the evidence has come up short for religious superstitions.

796. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38439 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 5:25 am

As an poster recommended, I double posted one of my posts in this thread at the Guardian's site. It took about 2 minutes to register and a poster is not allow to comment immediately after the first comment--10 minutes has passed and I still cannot post a new comment (EDIT: It takes 30 minutes before you can post another comment, all that does is encourage huge long comments--what a bunch of media dolts!).

If the Guardian thinks that approach is going to tame down discussion, well, let me put it bluntly, then that viewpoint is as much f*cktarded asshattery as it is their exclaiming that COMMENTING IS FREE. Oh, thank you, Guardian for your selfless action of allowing us to generate content for you. Mainstream media adapting to the Net? Where, I want to see it!

797. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38430 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:44 am

Atheists accept that theists sincerely believe in their beliefs despite lack of evidence, and that their beliefs are real to them. Bizarro Bunting could not go even that far in trusting that atheists know their own mind.

798. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38427 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:39 am

I agree with BaronOchs regarding the nature of Bunting's demand regardless if it is a facetious or sincere request for proof--that it is insulting in its implication we do not know our own minds and that if we did, we would lie anyway.

799. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38411 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 3:32 am

knox wrote, To kill people for believing something!
_______

You making it sound whimsical with your using something. In addition, you are not focusing on the aspects of the discussion in this thread which are clearly indicating that it is a very thorny question. Further more, no one is advocating that the new atheists who are in essence a herd of independent 'cats', band together and use this vague 'killing people for believing in something' as the strictly enforceable cannon of their 'movement'.

You do more damage in encouraging a sane discussion on thorny topics with your approach. Discussing ideas are not the same thing as endorsing them. I have found these discussions invaluable, and I appreciate their frankness.

800. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38399 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 2:19 am

phil rimmer wrote: It should also address the mixed blessing of this in a modern society, and the need for society to, ipso facto, demand proof for any individual's assertions. Etc. Etc.
_______

As relevo pointed out (93. Comment #38361 by relevo) and so many other posters before him, governments in general/society do not tend to encourage critical thinking. Obviously, it is not just the particular form of sloppy or non-thinking of which supporters of religious superstitions do, but in general, us humans shy away from emphasing that critical thinking--the teaching, learning, practicing, and applying it--is crucial for humanity in order to progress. Criticizing religion and its silly notion that believing without evidence is good is just a part of the more encompassing struggle of identifying concrete ways of encouraging critical thinking.

Our frontal lobes, which handle critical thinking, long term planning, etc. need to be 'pampered'. In the fight/flight reaction, the blood flows from the frontal lobes into the motor cortex to facilitate the flight/fight response. We do not feel this blood ebbing from our thinking region in our brains though we do feel the heart pounding, rapid breathing, etc. In performance psychology, emphasis is placed on maintaining calm in the face of stress, knowing how to compensate for the thinking center becoming less aware because of reduced blood flow. Already, elite members of our society use this tool via mediation/biofeedback.

As far as having family members who are not interested in listening to the challenging of their religious superstitions, I would suggest to focus on using critical thinking with them in other non-religious spheres of their lives, because that is the skill once developed will aid supporters of religious superstitions to start to turn the potency of critical thinking themselves onto the once taboo topic of their own religious superstitions. You, yourself, in doing this, will increase your own critical thinking skills.

And as others have mentioned, how do you qualitatively measure the positive effect that these hot-selling atheism books are having? How do you measure the viral effects of web-based discussions, videos, audios, blogging, etc.? Don't reduce arbitrarily the number of chickens before they start hatching and laying eggs which results in more chickens, more eggs, etc. Also, yet again, as others have stated, the religious side often 'pump' up the sales of their books.