Here's an interesting article from Shermer to ponder. Any thoughts?
Rational Atheism
by bavman 11 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
nicolaou
Thank you for this bavman. I'll comment when I've taken the time to read it through properly but for now I hope you don't mind me posting the article here..........
August 19, 2007
Rational Atheism
An open letter to Messrs. Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens
By Michael Shermer
Since the turn of the millennium, a new militancy has arisen among religious skeptics in response to three threats to science and freedom: (1) attacks against evolution education and stem cell research; (2) breaks in the barrier separating church and state leading to political preferences for some faiths over others; and (3) fundamentalist terrorism here and abroad. Among many metrics available to track this skeptical movement is the ascension of four books to the august heights of the New York Times best-seller list—Sam Harris’s Letter to a Christian Nation (Knopf, 2006), Daniel Dennett’s Breaking the Spell (Viking, 2006), Christopher Hitchens’s God Is Not Great (Hachette Book Group, 2007) and Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion (Houghton Mifflin, 2006)—that together, in Dawkins’s always poignant prose, “raise consciousness to the fact that to be an atheist is a realistic aspiration, and a brave and splendid one. You can be an atheist who is happy, balanced, moral and intellectually fulfilled.” Amen, brother.Whenever religious beliefs conflict with scientific facts or violate principles of political liberty, we must respond with appropriate aplomb. Nevertheless, we should be cautious about irrational exuberance. I suggest that we raise our consciousness one tier higher for the following reasons.
1. Anti-something movements by themselves will fail. Atheists cannot simply define themselves by what they do not believe. As Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises warned his anti-Communist colleagues in the 1950s: “An anti-something movement displays a purely negative attitude. It has no chance whatever to succeed. Its passionate diatribes virtually advertise the program they attack. People must fight for something that they want to achieve, not simply reject an evil, however bad it may be.”
2. Positive assertions are necessary. Champion science and reason, as Charles Darwin suggested: “It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against Christianity & theism produce hardly any effect on the public; & freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men’s minds which follow[s] from the advance of science. It has, therefore, been always my object to avoid writing on religion, & I have confined myself to science.”
3. Rational is as rational does. If it is our goal to raise people’s consciousness to the wonders of science and the power of reason, then we must apply science and reason to our own actions. It is irrational to take a hostile or condescending attitude toward religion because by doing so we virtually guarantee that religious people will respond in kind. As Carl Sagan cautioned in “The Burden of Skepticism,” a 1987 lecture, “You can get into a habit of thought in which you enjoy making fun of all those other people who don’t see things as clearly as you do. We have to guard carefully against it.”
4. The golden rule is symmetrical. In the words of the greatest consciousness raiser of the 20th century, Martin Luther King, Jr., in his epic “I Have a Dream” speech: “In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline.” If atheists do not want theists to prejudge them in a negative light, then they must not do unto theists the same.
5. Promote freedom of belief and disbelief. A higher moral principle that encompasses both science and religion is the freedom to think, believe and act as we choose, so long as our thoughts, beliefs and actions do not infringe on the equal freedom of others. As long as religion does not threaten science and freedom, we should be respectful and tolerant because our freedom to disbelieve is inextricably bound to the freedom of others to believe.
As King, in addition, noted: “The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.”
Rational atheism values the truths of science and the power of reason, but the principle of freedom stands above both science and religion.
-
the dreamer dreaming
in pondering why the pain of one can be the humor of another I came across something that may be relevant.
when someone wants to escape his Belief System, he will listen to anything he can use against his own doubts... but when he is happy with his BS, he will fight tooth and nail against anyone who threatens them.
in other words you can only reach those who are not happy with what they believe... anything you tell them will make them feel pleasure, while those who are happy will only feel pain... for those you can plant a seed, but it will only grow when they become dissatisfied with their BS...which may take a very long time.
-
wherehasmyhairgone
when someone wants to escape his Belief System, he will listen to anything he can use against his own doubts... but when he is happy with his BS, he will fight tooth and nail against anyone who threatens them.
I agree with this from my own personally experience.
The thing is Dawkins and hitchings are not running these books to convert the religious, by their own words their accept they would be lucky if they converted anyone, that isnt how rejection of belief works, it always comes from within.
However what their books do is put argument out their for anyone to ponder on.
I think the article misses the point. Someone who rejects the idea of any kind of god, what does she/he face, they face a organizations that claims.
1. they hold the answer to everything and claims an authority above any other human
your not dealing with rational mindset, so rational arguments never get anywhere. The problem is when you deal with a religious belief, you are hitting at the heart of someone core, some people have spent their entire life running it on the basis of reverence to their God, and you come along and say/ show that the chance of God existing is improbably, of course they will reject it, you are not dealing with rational mind you are dealing with an emotional mind. your suggesting that they have mis spent their entire life!
SO how do you deal with this, well you need to jar their own thinking, and in our society religion holds a prestigious and respectful place, they get given repsect above everything else. so you first need to bring this reverence down, you do it by showing how little scene it actually makes,
People used to believe in fairies and goblins etc, why don't they, i know not of any anti goblin movement still. but a mixture of lack of evidence and people own specticism growing due to the the inability of those who believe to show any really evidence. This is the way religion will go. atheist will not last in the sense of a social stand, it will just become that no on takes the idea of God generally as a rational view. having said that people will always believe something...e.g
I perform Mind-reading and other psychological illusionism for corporates, now even though i state that i am not psychic and have any extra powers, i always have some come up and clearly showing they believe what i am doing is real. so belief will always be with us. so even when i out rightly state this is all smoke and mirror, because it appeals to someone belief they take this evidence as proof they are right, even thought i tell them it not, that a hard mind set to break.
stumping a believer is met with ' well we don't know the mind of God or the horrible cringing god works in mysterious ways. which seem to surface the believer, and you are stale mate again, i recent discussion i had with a family member made the incredible statement of well you put to much trust in science, you know they gets it wrong sometimes.
I think softly softly approach and pandering to someone belief, and giving it reverence somehow isn't helping that person at all, in fact it is damaging them more.
For this time in our history i think Dawkins approach and moreso hitchings is they best way forward, but this approach will have to change in time, but right now religion has had many thousands of years to become accepted without question and above earnt respect. That needs to be challenged head on. Rational argument don't work at this stage in the main.
-
Brain Dead
In regards to Mr. Shermers comments, that certainly is rational and empathic to religious beliefs in general, it seems though to be too soft and weak of a stance to pose against
strong and vigilant religious beliefs, such as JWS for example. The balance of respect and tolerance has to be played out in equal portions to both ideologies, does it not ?
After all history has shown us that certain religions have killed people that didn't go along with their beliefs systems and this even continues today as we know.
In the way that the JWS are taught not to respect other religious beliefs or atheism for that matter I believe " the evil slave class or goats that are soon to be destroyed " is the term that
they are taught on, is not exactly a lot of respect and tolerance going on there is there. These power structured religions like the WTS. and others after all rooted and built on the obtainment
of power for a select few who seek it, this unfortunately usually results in giving humanity in general a kick in the balls. And it is for this reason that I've been an active atheist and have been
for years. My 2 cents
-
RAF
...
-
JCanon
The God Delusion (Houghton Mifflin, 2006)—that together, in Dawkins’s always poignant prose, “raise consciousness to the fact that to be an atheist is a realistic aspiration, and a brave and splendid one. You can be an atheist who is happy, balanced, moral and intellectually fulfilled.” Amen, brother.
Whenever religious beliefs conflict with scientific facts or violate principles of political liberty, we must respond with appropriate aplomb. Nevertheless, we should be cautious about irrational exuberance. I suggest that we raise our consciousness one tier higher for the following reasons.
I obtained "The God Delusion" and it's a well-written book but totally lightweight in addressing true issues. Right now though, these inquiries of doubt are beyond me, since I'm "out of the loop" having personally spoken with God, seen evidence of holy spirit, etc, including, of course, the arrangement by Jehovah for me to have a photo of the "sign of the son of man", an image confirmed to be seen by others by the Revelation Book. So ultimately while many wonder whether there is a God or not, I'm not in a position to speculate any more. I am in a position to have a good laugh, however.
Same old routine, though. In Noah's day nobody believed in rain. But eventually they all became true believers. When Armageddon starts, there will be a severe shortage of atheists, "rational" ones or otherwise!
JC
-
bavman
since I'm "out of the loop" having personally spoken with God, seen evidence of holy spirit, etc, including, of course, the arrangement by Jehovah for me to have a photo of the "sign of the son of man", an image confirmed to be seen by others by the Revelation Book. So ultimately while many wonder whether there is a God or not, I'm not in a position to speculate any more. I am in a position to have a good laugh, however.
Hey J, I was wondering if you could post a pic of your legs?...just wondering...Same old routine, though. In Noah's day nobody believed in rain. But eventually they all became true believers. When Armageddon starts, there will be a severe shortage of atheists, "rational" ones or otherwise!
JC
-
changeling
Thank you so much for posting that. The author's feelings on the subject mirror mine completely.
I feel vey strongly that to be negative, insulting or judgemental, of those who don't share out point of view, is not only wrong. but weakens our stand.
Personally, I am agnostic and religion bores me to tears. But I cannot in good consience attack those who are religious and deny them their right to believe as they wish.
Freedom is for all and if we deny someone their freedom we dimish our own as well.
Of course, freedom has natural limitations. We are not free to harm others in the name of freedom, so any religion that espouses violence to achieve their means should be discouraged.
changeling
-
Madame Quixote
"Of course, freedom has natural limitations. We are not free to harm others in the name of freedom, so any religion that espouses violence to achieve their means should be discouraged.
changeling"
Sorry, changeling, but in America, at least if you're the president, you do, apparently have the right, "in the name of freedom" to "harm others." You heard of Viet Nam, the Gulf War, Grenada, and the war on terror, right?
"any religion that espouses violence to achieve their means should be discouraged." Well, changeling, don't you think that about covers all the major religions, now? Seriously.