AC Grayling: Religion is in its "Death Throes" - Part 2

Lateline, ABC News, Australia, 03-01-2010

British philosopher A.C Grayling joins Lateline to discuss whether religion is enjoying a resurgence or dying.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• religion
• ac
• grayling
• jesus
• god
• bible
• christianity
• new
• atheism
• atheist

[IAMtheNewWorldOrder]

I like the point he makes at the beginning, about how if you want to teach religion as science, put it with ALL the other fucking religious stories, then after that, say "Now here's what the scientists think."

But this is what the entire argument really comes down to: Would you rather believe something just because you WANT to believe it, or would you rather believe what the facts, statistics, and evidence indicate.

[JoeyDiphard]

@ mycatisamoron

No "divisions or sectarianism"?

WANNA BET!?

"It forbids them the freedom and space to develop their own thinking and decide if they wish to sign up to the varied mumbo jumbo religions espouse."

"...the next generation could emerge more religious, more divided, more irrational than voters are now."

"...crippled by the stigma and idiocy which faith will impose on [the children]."

Read more:

tinyurl [dot] com/BanFaithSchools

[BoredToDistraction]

IAMtheNewWorldOrder's logic is not unreasonable. Your own understanding of the origin of the universe and of life is hundreds of years behind. Catching up would take a few hours of focused reading, if you value real knowledge/reality...

[TheAliceShow]

Great interview. Thanks for posting!

[GVD108]

You set forth a tough question to answer. Unfortunatly this is not the right forum to do so; lack of space. In brief: The "unversality" of all theism is: We as humans are flawed BECAUSE of our subjectivity, where we put ourselves in the center. If we put an absolute authority in the center we can begin to make true advancement. This will not only help the self but also society. Unfortunatly, like you said, there will NEVER be universal agreement, otherwise we'd already be in heaven.

[Sideways0J]

@GVD108

Nice try, but no. God doesn't solve the problem because the "objecivity" or "universality" of the supposed standard can never be established.

[GVD108]

Though this line of thought has some validity, it is in essence illogical. Your saying that a parent shouldn't tell their kids "don't touch fire, because it will burn you" because the kids will interpret that statement in their own way. Though it may take a while for a child to realize the statement, it doesn't make a parent stop giving a standard for what is right or wrong. Similarly, if God gives a standard, but people misinterpret it, it doesn't make having that standard less valid.

[Sideways0J]

@GVD108

No, nobody can give you this standard. Including God. Why? Because you're still human, so it's going to be interpreted and enacted subjectively anyway. God does not solve this problem.

[GVD108]

Actually your point is correct. The only problem is that, a lot of scientists DO speculate by saying there is NOT a God as a definite, or speculating that there WAS a big bang. Instead, if science was really all about what they could see and test, they would say what you did..."we don't know" Another point is that just because we cant see something physically, doesn't mean there isn't logical evidence all around us for it. Example: gravity. Can't see it, but there is evidence for it.

[IAMtheNewWorldOrder]

I know what you are saying. Nature does function a lot like manmade machines.

The difference is, when I see the watch, I know that I can find a watchmaker and watch him build the watch with my own eyes. I can SEE the watch's creator. With nature, the only creator I see are clouds that bring rain, semen and eggs that bring reproduction, and the wombs & soil that incubate life. I do not see anything beyond that, so why should I even speculate, let alone believe in anything beyond that?

[GVD108]

Your logic is unreasonable. If you stumble upon a watch in the street. You automatically assume that there was a watchmaker...everyone does. A single cell organism, and the universe as a whole is infinitly more complicated than a watch, yet you assume it happened by chance...and not by design. Say what you will about the illogic of man's interpretation of God's laws, but it is unreasonable and unscientific to assume something other than the obvious. That there is Intelligent Design.

[IAMtheNewWorldOrder]

What is the chance of you making the building with your mind?