WLC: Leading troll, when he criticizes .the intelligence of atheist philosophers and writers he doing little more than parroting criticisms leveled at apologists. the difference is by atheists, the difference is the atheists can demonstrate the claim without quote mining.
Yes the "new atheists" posit that respect for religion bad. They also say we should respect the people. As Dawkins quoted ""I respect you too much as a humanbeing to respect your stupid ideas"
Religion IS toxic and the aim is not to wipe it out but to get people to FREELY think for themselves! IF, DOING THAT, eliminates religion....then so be it!
The only thing "new" about atheism is that we're actually SPEAKING OUT! Any CREDIBLE Atheists, INCLUDING the books mentioned, do NOT say nor act upon the premise that
disrespecting Theists is a good idea. What they and many Atheists DO SAY is that religion and IT'S MESSAGE OUGHT TO BE disrespected and thrown out as it IS IMMORAL!
Tim also says that scholars can see the weaknesses in these author's arguments, but so could I. But their arguments aren't meant to appeal to professional apologists, they are meant to appeal to people who might be on the fence or haven't given the idea of god and religion too much thought. They're also not meant to definitively prove god doesn't exist, only to provide food for thought. These authors, with the exception of Dennet, are not claiming to be professional philosophers.
There are in fact plenty of other authors who have composed collections of different arguments against the existence of the various gods (for those whom the myth-hood status of gods are not abundantly obvious), but besides that, there is still no tangible evidence or even a positive ontological description for god that has been presented. They love the fine tuning argument but even that is easily refuted.
Now, when Tim says that the "new" atheists are pushing an attitude of removing respect for religion, I would agree with that. I also believe it's the correct attitude. Religion does not deserve the respect of rational people. It's based on faith which is belief without evidence or even the possibility of evidence. It is, simply put, moronic. We should shame people for believing in superstition and myth. How else will they learn?
William L Craig says that he disagrees that atheists are intellectuals. Yet again, facts and reality mean nothing to WLC. Atheists on average score a higher IQ than theists. Atheists on average score higher on quizes about religion than religious people. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of Scientists are in fact atheists. Sure, there might be some out spoken christian scientists, but they are the minority.
@DeimosSaturn You misquoted William Lane Craig. To say a group, say for example nihilist are "intellectuals" is a broad, subjective and quite elementary statement. I regards your claims on IQ scores and scientist, even if they are true, what do they have to do with the arguments presented by "New Atheist" such as Dawkins, Hitchens, Denitt, and Harris, such as religion being the root of all evil?
@JP12akacoil "what do they have to do with the arguments presented by "New Atheist" such as Dawkins, Hitchens, Denitt, and Harris, such as religion being the root of all evil? "
I love how you complain about misquoting when you forward such blatant lies.
None of those authors have ever made that statement. What they have said is that religion is a source of much *completely unnecessary* "evil" caused by people being deluded. They all appeal to reason and evidence to counter this.
@JP12akacoil That is, the new atheists all oppose the idea that faith can be a virtue. That, by far, is the main message of the new atheists. Not that religion is the root of all evil. It just happens to be a very great evil, and a tool capable of justifying any action. Will God reward you infinitely for blowing up the infidels? No problem - Justified. Will he punish you with hell for not doing it? No problem - Justified.
@JP12akacoil In the end, what is important is if religions are true, and that should come down to reason and evidence, not faith. People should know what the consequences of blowing other people up are, not merely accept that such actions are going to send them to heaven because some desert monkey wrote it.
Yet all major religions will defend that faith is a virtue, even though it can perfectly well be used in the manner above.
@JP12akacoil I didn't misquote him because I didn't quote him period. I paraphrased. And actually, I said WLC SAID that OTHERS SAY atheists are the intellectuals and that HE (WLC) says that they are wrong. Basically, WLC doesn't think Atheists are smarter than theists, when in fact all the evidence available completely contradicts him.
WLC: Leading troll, when he criticizes .the intelligence of atheist philosophers and writers he doing little more than parroting criticisms leveled at apologists. the difference is by atheists, the difference is the atheists can demonstrate the claim without quote mining.
Yes the "new atheists" posit that respect for religion bad. They also say we should respect the people. As Dawkins quoted ""I respect you too much as a humanbeing to respect your stupid ideas"
EmmittBrownBTTF1 2 months ago
Religion IS toxic and the aim is not to wipe it out but to get people to FREELY think for themselves! IF, DOING THAT, eliminates religion....then so be it!
julzabro 2 months ago
The only thing "new" about atheism is that we're actually SPEAKING OUT! Any CREDIBLE Atheists, INCLUDING the books mentioned, do NOT say nor act upon the premise that
disrespecting Theists is a good idea. What they and many Atheists DO SAY is that religion and IT'S MESSAGE OUGHT TO BE disrespected and thrown out as it IS IMMORAL!
julzabro 2 months ago
What would a believer in an unproven, nonexistent skydaddy know about intellect?
julzabro 2 months ago
WLC- King of Straw.
blackadm 2 months ago
Tim also says that scholars can see the weaknesses in these author's arguments, but so could I. But their arguments aren't meant to appeal to professional apologists, they are meant to appeal to people who might be on the fence or haven't given the idea of god and religion too much thought. They're also not meant to definitively prove god doesn't exist, only to provide food for thought. These authors, with the exception of Dennet, are not claiming to be professional philosophers.
DeimosSaturn 2 months ago
There are in fact plenty of other authors who have composed collections of different arguments against the existence of the various gods (for those whom the myth-hood status of gods are not abundantly obvious), but besides that, there is still no tangible evidence or even a positive ontological description for god that has been presented. They love the fine tuning argument but even that is easily refuted.
DeimosSaturn 2 months ago
Now, when Tim says that the "new" atheists are pushing an attitude of removing respect for religion, I would agree with that. I also believe it's the correct attitude. Religion does not deserve the respect of rational people. It's based on faith which is belief without evidence or even the possibility of evidence. It is, simply put, moronic. We should shame people for believing in superstition and myth. How else will they learn?
DeimosSaturn 2 months ago
William L Craig says that he disagrees that atheists are intellectuals. Yet again, facts and reality mean nothing to WLC. Atheists on average score a higher IQ than theists. Atheists on average score higher on quizes about religion than religious people. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of Scientists are in fact atheists. Sure, there might be some out spoken christian scientists, but they are the minority.
DeimosSaturn 2 months ago
@DeimosSaturn You misquoted William Lane Craig. To say a group, say for example nihilist are "intellectuals" is a broad, subjective and quite elementary statement. I regards your claims on IQ scores and scientist, even if they are true, what do they have to do with the arguments presented by "New Atheist" such as Dawkins, Hitchens, Denitt, and Harris, such as religion being the root of all evil?
JP12akacoil 2 months ago
@JP12akacoil "what do they have to do with the arguments presented by "New Atheist" such as Dawkins, Hitchens, Denitt, and Harris, such as religion being the root of all evil? "
I love how you complain about misquoting when you forward such blatant lies.
None of those authors have ever made that statement. What they have said is that religion is a source of much *completely unnecessary* "evil" caused by people being deluded. They all appeal to reason and evidence to counter this.
Gnomefro 2 months ago
@JP12akacoil That is, the new atheists all oppose the idea that faith can be a virtue. That, by far, is the main message of the new atheists. Not that religion is the root of all evil. It just happens to be a very great evil, and a tool capable of justifying any action. Will God reward you infinitely for blowing up the infidels? No problem - Justified. Will he punish you with hell for not doing it? No problem - Justified.
Gnomefro 2 months ago
@JP12akacoil In the end, what is important is if religions are true, and that should come down to reason and evidence, not faith. People should know what the consequences of blowing other people up are, not merely accept that such actions are going to send them to heaven because some desert monkey wrote it.
Yet all major religions will defend that faith is a virtue, even though it can perfectly well be used in the manner above.
Gnomefro 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JP12akacoil I didn't misquote him because I didn't quote him period. I paraphrased. And actually, I said WLC SAID that OTHERS SAY atheists are the intellectuals and that HE (WLC) says that they are wrong. Basically, WLC doesn't think Atheists are smarter than theists, when in fact all the evidence available completely contradicts him.
DeimosSaturn 2 months ago