401. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123505 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 9:20 am

"...so I could beat him senseless."

...with his book.

402. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #123500 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 9:16 am

al-rawandi,

Don't buy Vox's book, for heaven's sake.

Spend your money on this, much more informative, book:

http://www.amazon.com/Dog-Poop-Initiative-Kirk-Weisler/dp/1932280839

403. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123466 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 8:17 am

BeyondBelief,

Keep it to yourself! Joking. You make a very important point, if not somewhat melodramatic. Your obviously not from Sweden.

404. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123425 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 6:21 am

MPhil,

Meant to include all that, boy I'm out of my league now.

405. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123405 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 5:31 am

"What would be needed is uncaused causation."

And even if every particle in the universe could be accounted for with no apparent cause except for a cyclic causation of itself, the question could still be raised regarding the 'uncaused causation'. We're never going to be rid of the God botherers are we?

406. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123402 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 5:19 am

"But, being a compatibilist - I don't really think there is something to fear, or to want to be ignorant of :)"

Not that you have a choice.

"...spontaneous causal-power of the will"

And if it is spontaneous that then begs the question 'what causes it to be spontaneous' and we're back to where we started. Did someone ever say life is like a merry-go-round?

407. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123396 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 5:01 am

MPhil smelt that one from a mile away :)

408. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123394 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 4:59 am

"I am not pessimistic at all. I disagree with scooter on just about everything (except the non-existence of Gods). I believe in free will."

Scooter, I admire your positivism (ducks from Richard). Steve, I think the belief in free will is the very essence of it. Free will just well may be only a mental construct, nonetheless a powerful and necessary one. The last stand of our ignorant bliss, sometimes I just don't wanna know.

409. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123384 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 4:29 am

"If it does exist, then you are right. If it doesn't exist, then you have no choice about what you believe anyway...."

And from a purely materialistic point of view all the stuff in between being born and fertilizing the flora doesn't make any difference at all, our precious freewill is as good as mulch. Boy, how pessimistic can you get. On a brighter note...

410. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123376 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 4:14 am

Scooter,

Options or choices are often a guise to make one feel as they are exersizing 'freewill', just a wider tunnel leading to the same destination.

411. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123372 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 4:04 am

Steve - "Yes, but to many religious people, that is rather threatening. And change the words "science and religion" to "faith and scripture", and "scientific truth" to "love of God" and see how what you have said reads :)"

You meant "science and reason"? I see your point. Well I guess it's just going to be a good old slug fest between reason and religion.

412. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123369 by LorienRyan on February 7, 2008 at 3:52 am

Richard,

Yes, we are all preaching something to varying degrees. Sometimes it is respectfully presented for listeners to make of it what they will, and sometimes it is an embellished plea to 'see the light'. Although when it's broken down, as you have, it looks glib and fundies really believe it is their God given duty. Speaking from personal experience (now I'm in trouble :)), when I have really been 'preached' at by a fundie it seems to me to be a violation of some sort of social convention. On the glib side, a fundies wide eyed salivating and desperate state of mind is not going to be receptive to a strategically placed jibe, like the Hitchens comment. Although if the audience gets a chuckle not all is lost. By the way - good reply.

413. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123305 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 11:16 pm

Steve,

Haha, very good. Although your aim is to help people see truth through science and reason not just because of the way you feel about it. And the bonus of scientific truth is that it is wonderful also!

Regards.

*Gone*

414. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123303 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 11:04 pm

Steve,

I hope in the context of people evangelising their own personal experiences you can see my point.

Must go. Thanks for your replies.

Peace.

415. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123300 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 10:53 pm

Richard,

In the context of debating with religious opponents, and IMHO, Hitchens general approach seems more down to earth as opposed to attempting them to accept scientific proofs. Hitchens subtle appeal to this being "the attitude of a normal person" is an effective contrast to most of his opponents evangelistic dispositions. Also, I admire it in the context of Hitchens focus on human decency in his debates, as many of the religious like to bring up the Hitler, Stalin, etc., issue, whereas he himself, and most atheists, are an example that this is not true. Futhermore, I believe that the underlying attitude in the statement "believe what you want just don't try and make me believe it too" is admirable, don't you? Why is it not admirable?

416. Blasphemy

Comment #123288 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 8:19 pm

Shrommer,

I would rather see the planet filled up with passionate people who aim to love and do good regardless of their persuasions. By the way, is there any statistical basis for your assumption about secularized Muslims? What about Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

417. Christopher Hitchens on Books & Ideas

Comment #123281 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 7:54 pm

I really admire Hitchen's general position of "believe what you want just don't try and make me believe it too", which he makes a point of in his debate with Timothy Jackson. Hitchen's focus on human rights, morality and altruism in most of his dialogue, I believe, is such a positive statement about his atheism, oops sorry Hitch, anti-theism. I, for one, am grateful he speaks for so many of us 'non-persuaded by religion'. Keep up the good work Christopher Hitchens.

418. Ad 'likely to offend gay people'

Comment #123267 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 6:43 pm

It is no surprise that the 'Christian Congress for Traditional Values' would have an anti-gay stance, no doubt CCTV would be anti-anything-against-the-doctrine-of-CCTV. The trouble here is that their claim 'Gay aim: abolish the family' simply isn't true, not judging from the gay people I know anyway.

419. The New Atheist Movement

Comment #123262 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 6:25 pm

Wonder who the mysterious professer was?

75% of college students losing faith, um, because their learning the truth and how to think critically maybe? Can't have that!

'The anvil that is wearing out hammers', is that really a complement?

420. Science Debate 2008

Comment #122811 by LorienRyan on February 6, 2008 at 6:08 am

Post #122616 looks like a questionnaire for a grade 3 RE class.

Epinephrine,

Second that.

421. Blasphemy

Comment #122721 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 9:45 pm

Styrer,

Please, I'm not trying to defend Dennett or any presupposed devotion to. I think it is obvious that 'intellectual integrity' is not the primary issue here. I doubt your good self goes about your day to day dealings observing this lofty creed. Having said that, I agree with everything you've said, leaving the assumptions aside. In the case of Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh, I support Dennett's approach.

Must go. Styrer - thanks for your replies.

Peace

422. Blasphemy

Comment #122692 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Apologies for spelling your name incorrectly, slight dyslexia. :)

Styrer - "...will Dennett be prepared to pamper to the moderates in an attempt to bring on some kind of religious reformation, while forgoing wholesale a full denunciation and condemnation of those very tenets which an intellectually honest engagement surely requires?"

That is the very point! When intellectually honest engagement cannot meet the requirements of non-violence, the central issue here, a strategy has to be formulated. Otherwise the whole exersise becomes degraded into the very thing that you are 'fighting' against. How far would I go? Well that depends on whether my motive is to actually make a difference or to satisfy my own angst.

423. Blasphemy

Comment #122678 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 7:40 pm

Stryer - "Is it too much to ask that a figure of such intellectual eminence as Dennett not be granted an uncritical pass on all of his utterances? The same goes for the other Horsemen, of course."

Absolutely.

"...a war between reason and supernatural superstition."

No doubt, although strategy does not necessarily imply 'dishonesty' and/or 'condescension'. I, for one, support this type of approach. In a less than ideal world sometimes the ends justifies the means, and in this case, IMHO, ideological nitpicking isn't going to serve a good cause.

424. Blasphemy

Comment #122667 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 7:08 pm

Stryer - "There is a vein of dishonesty running through his piece, and no little condescension. Is he not really saying here: 'Of course moderates are as whacko in what they believe as the fundies, but the mods can surely be played to more effectively'?"

Merely a projection on your behalf. Dennett doesn't indicate any criticism of their beliefs, in fact, he writes, "...Islam is a great faith that has no need for violence or intimidation to maintain the loyalty of its congregation." Dennett's letter is an appeal to human rights, not a criticism of Islam, per se.

425. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122655 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 6:30 pm

"I am passionate about the public education of science. I want to write something that educates people about how to think scientifically."

And the level of benevolence you display in your posts indicates you are qualified to do just that.

Regards.

426. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122650 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 6:25 pm

Steve,

Gushing praise aside. Write the books! You obviously have the time.

427. An Altar Beyond Olympus for a Deity Predating Zeus

Comment #122471 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 10:01 am

Cartomancer,

You might find this link of interest:

The etymology of God...

http://thebiggestsecret.online.fr/ancient_history/etymological_devil.htm

428. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122422 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 8:47 am

MPhil,

It's displaying correctly in Notepad, I even got the little dots.

429. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122412 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 8:39 am

Geoff,

Publication and peer review would have played a role in it's becoming accepted as a theory I guess.

430. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122388 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 8:18 am

copy to notepad (yes a Windows user)...

Thanks MPhil.

431. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122338 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 7:46 am

Anyone interested in the philosophy of science I would highly recommend:

'What is this thing called Science', A.F. Chalmers, UQC (University of Queensland Press).

MPhil, yes interested.

432. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122331 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 7:42 am

epeeist,

It would depend on whether your trying to explain it in terms of an authoritative definition as oppossed to a philosophical ideal, I guess.

433. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122320 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 7:32 am

PJG,

And I'd imagine many different shades of also...nonetheless a nicely succinct explanation.

434. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122314 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 7:18 am

Steve,

There is a good explanation at:

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

435. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122277 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 4:28 am

healthyphysicist,

ah yes, lol, memory mix up - I blame it on my misspent youth.

436. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122266 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 3:30 am

epeeist,

Great article. I admire Matthew Levy's and Marie Tieche's passion and dedication.

437. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122263 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 3:08 am

Apologies - 'it was the Jews who were right' according to Atkinson.

Welcome to Hell: Rowan Atkinson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFGrQMD6Uqc

438. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122261 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 2:58 am

Well, it was the Mormons according to Rowan Atkinson - so we could send him a transcript of Romney's 'Address to the Galactic Senate.'

439. Dusty Clues: Study suggests no dearth of Earths

Comment #122255 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 2:39 am

"How would Pat Robertson rationalise that one?"

Probably by sending pamphlets with a suggested donation.

440. Math Religion Trouble

Comment #122235 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 12:52 am

"...they are as baffled as a twenty-year old who lives his life as a level-32 paladin in Dungeons"

lol

Freeman Dyson, brilliant physicist, religious man who goes to church. Nothing wrong with that, couldn't do it myself, but, I find it difficult to understand how they maintain the dichotomy. Surely when pressed McGrath, Dyson would have to admit to some sort of nostalgic appreciation of internal conceptual modelling in the brain.

441. Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

Comment #122227 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 12:33 am

epeeist,

I doubt the Admin here would waste their time - wooter, wipeout, blacknad, becomethearrow, hes2@usa... it's all the same rubbish.

442. There Are No Ghosts in Your Brain

Comment #122225 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 12:29 am

irate_atheist

Yes. Their trolling efforts sure have taken a beating, a proverbial massacre.

443. Math Religion Trouble

Comment #122220 by LorienRyan on February 5, 2008 at 12:08 am

MPhil,

Can't get anything past you! :)

Just expressing a sentiment really, although, that's an important point you make and makes me wonder about the McGrath types out there, is this what they are meaning when discussing their religion - otherwise how would they keep such a straight face.

444. Math Religion Trouble

Comment #122214 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 11:49 pm

I guess the math religion trouble is that there is nothing to model the math on. Leaving the mind to ponder itself, happily considering all the possibilities of what could be, a tiptoe through the tulips really.

445. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #122208 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 11:27 pm

All said and done didn't this all turn out to be one big anti-climax, just a lot of froth 'n' bubble.

446. The empty myths peddled by evangelists of unbelief

Comment #122148 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 8:21 pm

"While theologians have interrogated their beliefs for millennia, secular humanists have yet to question their simple creed."

I think I shall exersise my 'redeeming doubt' on that one.

447. Admitting that you have no religion is not politically correct

Comment #122086 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Sarah95 - "And if anyone has any tips on starting successful freethought groups, feel free to contribute them in this thread!"

Yeah, name them the 'Chocolate Appreciation Society', oh but that might offend those who prefer jelly babies, but seriously, this is pure discrimination.

448. My critics are wrong to call me dogmatic

Comment #121817 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 7:48 am

For some reason it wouldn't take the long URL - i've edited it.

449. My critics are wrong to call me dogmatic

Comment #121807 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 7:40 am

Discovery Institute comments on Dawkin's flea:

"Recalling Dawkins's earlier work Climbing Mount Improbable, McGrath notes Dawkins's admission that humanity's existence itself is overwhelmingly improbable. But of course we exist. "We may be highly improbable�quot;yet we are here," writes McGrath. "The issue, then, is not whether God is probable but whether he is actual."


The Blindsidedness of McGrath is astounding. Can't he see that he's just making it more difficult for himself?



The rest of the article can be found at:

http://www.discovery.org/

Click on 'Deconstructing Dawkins'

450. Sprinting down the evolutionary highway

Comment #121764 by LorienRyan on February 4, 2008 at 5:27 am

yanco - "The only biological evolution on humans I can now imagine, would be due to manipulation of our own DNA. But am not sure if it would still count as "evolution".. "

Why not? How is it any different, unless you attribute something other than natural processes to human activity. Something magical maybe.