|
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
 Posted - 10/01/2008 : 09:11:20
|
Can someone please help me figure out just what the point of this Newsweek editorial is?
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161225
Lisa Miller starts out describing her argument against atheists like this:”First, if 90-odd percent of Americans say they believe in God, it's unhelpful to dismiss them as silly. Second, when they check that "believe in God" box, a great many people are not talking about the God the atheists rail against—a supernatural being who intervenes in human affairs, who lays down inexplicable laws about sex and diet, punishes violators with the stinking fires of hell and raises the fleshly bodies of the dead.” She goes on to criticize Hitchens who, when debating a Catholic Priest at the Templeton Foundation, attacked the traditional Christian concept of God and its consequences, while the priest never said he agreed with that concept. She says: “Over and over, the priest expressed his sympathy and agreement. … Albacete's God is not the one Hitchens objects to, and that, he seemed to say, is that.”
So…she seems to be saying that atheists should stop arguing about God with religious folk because you can't be sure who those religious folk consider “God” to be.
Is that really it? Please tell me I got it wrong. Because that doesn't make any sense to me, and makes me think she doesn't understand atheism very well. Atheists deny the existence of ANY god. It doesn't matter what that conception of god is, weather he interferes in human events or not. And about Hitchens: I don't think it unreasonable to assume that a Catholic priest would subscribe to the traditional Christian concept of God that Hitchens attacked. It was a debate, after all. What else were they supposed to discuss?
Another indication that she doesn't understand what she's criticizing is this: “Submitting faith to proof is absurd. Reason defines one kind of reality (what we know); faith defines another (what we don't know). Reasonable believers can live with both at once.” This is absurd. There is only one Reality, and Reason is a guide to understanding it. “What we don't know” is just the flip side to “what we know” and is dealt with just fine by Reason: we say we don't know. Faith does not define what we don't know, it's nothing more than a foundationless guess to explain it. And there can be so many different faiths to explain the unknown that it's silly to put “faith” in any one of them.
Lisa Miller doesn't really seem to understand atheism, and as a result her “argument” falls flat.
At least that's my take on it.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/01/2008 : 09:39:57 [Permalink]
|
I think the point is to further cloud the issue, and I like what you've written.
Lisa Miller:
| The problem with religion is not belief itself, which even in the most orthodox believers is inconsistent, but the (violent or oppressive) enforcing of one truth over another. |
The problem with "belief" is that it is "belief" and is unconcerned with reality. If 90% of the people in this country have some measure of apathy towards reality, then I would wonder if they're trying to force some unreality on someone somewhere. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
 |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/01/2008 : 11:30:49 [Permalink]
|
A poster on another site said something I thought was pretty interesting. To paraphrase, he said that a lie is the opposite of truth. A liar crafts his lies with regard to the truth he wishes to conceal. Bullshit is something a little different in that it has no connection to the truth at all. A bullshitter just doesn't care about the truth when spouting bullshit, and as a result might sometimes even inadvertently end up being correct on occasion. That's how faith operates, with a complete disregard for truth. Faith is bullshit. And Lisa Miller sounds like a consummate bullshit artist.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 10/01/2008 11:31:35 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/01/2008 : 12:17:26 [Permalink]
|
The bottom line is that you can't argue against atheists if your going to make up your own definition of what an atheist is.
The whole article is a strawman.
I would argue that there really are people of faith who function, at least where science and politics are concerned, as secularists. But I sure wouldn't use her arguments... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 10/01/2008 : 12:18:56 [Permalink]
|
Cloudy BS. I like it.
The more I read it, the less it makes sense. It's just nonsensical babble. How can Newsweek publish such drivel? I could do a better job, and thats not saying much. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/01/2008 : 13:31:30 [Permalink]
|
Ok, I just read the article. She's another one who mistakes the vagueness of her position as a strength. She dislikes that many atheists focus on "a supernatural being who intervenes in human affairs, who lays down inexplicable laws about sex and diet, punishes violators with the stinking fires of hell and raises the fleshly bodies of the dead." But we do so because that's the most coherent definition of god offered. Theistic arguments go downhill after that, possessing even less substance to argue in their favor. A vague notion of some divine being is less intellectually defensible than the Old Testament god of fire and brimstone, not more. If your god is even more vaporous than Yahweh, then that's even less reason to believe in him.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 10/03/2008 : 15:38:08 [Permalink]
|
I don't recognize the premise that atheists deny the existance of any God.
Atheists do not recognize as valid any concept of a diety. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
 |
|
Arguing Against the Atheists?
