A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian (page 13)

Apognophos

I just don't understand why cofty thinks believers should be, and can be, heckled out of their beliefs if they contradict science. That shows a moderate lack of respect for the person and a massive lack of understanding of human psychology.

Berengaria

Let people believe whatever they want, and quit trying to control them.

NightOwl

Now THAT is a hoot!

tec

A Manual for Creating Atheists offers the first-ever guide not for talking people into faith--but for talking them out of it. Peter Boghossian draws on the tools he has developed and used for more than twenty years as a philosopher and educator to teach how to engage the faithful in conversations that will help them value reason and rationality, cast doubt on their religious beliefs, mistrust their faith, abandon superstition and irrationality, and ultimately embrace reason. - Amazon...

This of course makes the assumption that a person of faith (not the same as a religious person)... is not reasonable or rational to begin with.

It is arrogant right from the start... which is exactly what this 'militant atheist movement' IS. Arrogant. I mean, the fact that there are manuals now for creating atheists... is a clue that it IS a movement seeking converts, so everyone can be atheists just like them, lol.

But it will sell books. Because the issue is popular right now, and so there is demand.

Not that I have a problem with all these arguments and supposed challenges to faith. Faith stands, despite the opinions of others that it is irrational and unreasonable. Because the source of faith stands. Truth is truth... regardless of what people want to think about it.

Faith in Christ that is.

Faith, in religion and in men (and the golden calfs they create), falls every day.

"Up to now, most atheists have simply criticized religion in various ways, but the point is to dispel it. In A Manual For Creating Atheists, "Peter Boghossian fills that gap, telling the reader how to become a 'street epistemologist' with the skills to attack religion at its weakest point: its reliance on faith rather than evidence. This book is essential for nonbelievers who want to do more than just carp about religion, but want to weaken its odious grasp on the world." --Jerry Coyne, Ph.D., author of Why Evolution is True

Religion and faith are not the same things. I have no problem with religion losing its grip on people. Religon is of man. So man can destroy it. Faith, however, is of God. Man cannot destroy that. In some perhaps, but not completely. No book or manual or tactic will be able to do what some atheists are hoping to happen.

Encouraging people to embrace reason and evidence, to think rationaly and give up superstitions is not arrogant.

Judging that a person of faith is not reasonable, does not embrace evidence, does not think rationally, or is superstitious... however... IS arrogant.

Just because someone believes in God doesn't mean they haven't looked at the facts - tornapart

99.99% of the time it does. Cofty

Could you please provide evidence for that statement and percentage?

Peace,

tammy

cofty

Village Girl - Reason, evidence and facts are the best way to help sincere people leave the WT. I never mock people, however it is disrespectful to go along with people's superstitions. We are capable of much better.

cofty

Apog - I personally know of many people who gave up a superstitious worldview through the presentation of evidence and reason.

This of course makes the assumption that a person of faith ... is not reasonable or rational to begin with - Tammy

They aren't. They may be very intelligent, but by definition they are not rational. Faith and rational thinking are diametrically opposed.

Apognophos

Well, I can't contest your personal experience, though it's not been my experience. I think it depends on whether we're talking about making an adversarial challenge to someone's faith versus putting the information out there for others to approach on their own terms. I just think that people don't change their beliefs unless they are ready to. "When the student is ready, the teacher appears." I would rather see science advocacy threads like the one that talks about ERVs and other genetic evidence for evolution (I can't find it now...). It's a pro-evolution argument rather than an attack on faith. That way the information is there for those who are curious and open-minded enough to read it.

tec

Just some definitions of rational to be mulled over, because calling someone rational or irrational, seems here to be based entirely on opinion and your own subjective (and biased) beliefs... ie, according to you and some other atheists, "unless a person comes to the conclusion of atheism, like we have, they are irrational and unreasonable. So then anyone who is not an atheist, is irrational and unreasonable. Assuming that we are correct, that is."

Rationality is the quality or state of being agreeable to reason. [1] An action, belief, or desire is rational if we ought to choose it. [2] Rationality is a normative concept that refers to the conformity of one's beliefs with one's reasons to believe, or of one's actions with one's reasons for action. "Rationality" has different specialized meanings in economics, sociology, psychology, evolutionary biology and political science. A rational decision is one that is not just reasoned, but is also optimal for achieving a goal or solving a problem.

ra·tion·al (rsh-nl)

adj. 1. Having or exercising the ability to reason. 2. Of sound mind; sane. 3. Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior. See Synonyms at logical. 4. Mathematics Capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers.

.

What is logical or rational behavior? Your opinion on that will define whether or not you call someone else rational... but it IS just your opinion.

.

Peace, tammy

EdenOne

They may be very intelligent, but by definition they are not rational

Let me ask you, Cofty: Who is more evolved - the intelligent one, or the rational one? (assuming your premise that some intelligent individuals may not be very rational, and, I suppose, that some rational individuals may not be very intelligent as well)

Also, what tammy said:

"Just because someone believes in God doesn't mean they haven't looked at the facts" (tornapart)

"99.99% of the time it does." (Cofty)

So, by your standards, only 1 in every 10.000 believers in God has examined the 'facts' that you so ardently cherish? I thought that rational people didn't resort to hyperbolic statements. Or do you have evidence to back up that ridiculous statistic?

Eden

cofty

I would rather see science advocacy threads like the one that talks about ERVs and other genetic evidence for evolution - Apognophos

Yes I think its important to do both. I contribute a lot to science threads for that reason. The Common Ancestry Thread is a good example...

Tammy, a rational person does not allow their beliefs to exceed the evidence. Faith exists to make up for the paucity of evidence for a spirit world. People of faith are therefore not being rational, at least as far as that part of their lives are concerned. Just celebrate your faith and eschew reason. It would be much more honest.

Who is more evolved - the intelligent one, or the rational one? - EdenOne

There is no such thing as "more evolved". White, upper-class, Victorian men would have recognised the term but it is based on an outdated understanding of the world.

I thought that rational people didn't resort to hyperbolic statements.

Why did you think that? Hyperbole, satire and even ridicule all have their place.

nicolaou

Thanks for the heads up on this Cofty, I've enjoyed Boghossians YouTube channel and look forward to reading this new book.

A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian

Share this