Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#199751 - 11/03/06 06:53 PM Re: Wired Magazine/The New Atheism [Re: Quaark]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
I love Penn and Teller.

But, as funny and entertaining as they are, they still don't fully 'get' their religious opponents either. They seem to do better than Harris, at least, where marketing their ideas is concerned.
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#199752 - 11/03/06 08:21 PM Dawkins the politician. [Re: Virus9]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 12591
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Dawkins has rejected Darwinian macroevolution? He no longer holds that matter is primary? He has embraced free will as real? When did all that happen?

What I have found is that he says one thing but when you analyze what he says then it really means something quite different.

For example for free will to exist it needs to not be an illusion, "statistical" or otherwise.

I see a lot of "sleight of mouth" from this fellow.

Top
#199753 - 11/03/06 09:10 PM Re: Dawkins the politician. [Re: Nemo]
Hagen von Tronje Offline

CoS Priest

Registered: 06/28/01
Posts: 10143
Yes, Dawkins actually rejected the pure Darwinian idea of evolution a long time ago, along with most evolutionists. "Darwinism" now is a misnomer applied to the theory of natural selection itself; natural selection, as opposed to Darwin's antiquated theory of it, is a mathematical certainty in any group that is capable of experiencing both change and duplication.

Dawkin's idea is far, far more sophisticated than most, and certainly wins me over as far as evolutionary theories go. It won't surprise me if one or two details are now considered "dated" since his primary work was done nearly 30 years ago, but his essential idea of evolution being focused solely on the gene, not the individual or the group, is nearly bulletproof.

Evolutionary science is a field sadly muddied by the most vocal proponents, for and against it. I tend to like Dawkins, if for no other reason than because he sees the folly of trying to integrate science with religion.
_________________________
"The devil I'll bring you," answered Hagen. "I have enough to carry with my shield and breastplate; my helm is bright, the sword is in my hand, therefore I bring you naught."

Top
#199754 - 11/03/06 09:14 PM Re: Dawkins the politician. [Re: Nemo]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
Quote:

For example for free will to exist it needs to not be an illusion, "statistical" or otherwise.




It is not necessary for will to be metaphysically free for it to be free in the practical or ethical sense, which I take it is what really matters.
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#199755 - 11/03/06 09:21 PM Re: Wired Magazine/The New Atheism [Re: Quaark]
reprobate Offline

CoS Warlock

Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 7140
Loc: Canada
Quote:

Caustic?

Perhaps, but it sure isn't stuffy and humorless.




Not stuffy, but still alienating for Joe Bluecollar who might not be a devout fundy, feels he has a prima facie duty to support religion because it's the right thing to do, but who might be capable of responding to something from the atheists if it were a bit more congenial. Those are the ones who need to be won, and an aggressive, mostly urban intelligensia isn't exactly a good outreach party.
_________________________
reprobate

Top
#199756 - 11/04/06 02:00 AM Re: Dawkins the politician. [Re: Nemo]
Virus9 Offline
CoS Priest

Registered: 08/06/01
Posts: 2108
Loc: Florida

Dawkins has rejected Darwinian macroevolution?


Did he ever support it?

He no longer holds that matter is primary?

Does a wholly predictiable universe logically follow the primacy of matter? Heisenberg might have something to say about that.

He has embraced free will as real?

Real enough to be of consequence. If he hadn't, why would he be trying so hard to gain converts?

When did all that happen?

1976. It was probably earlier, but that's when his first book was published.


What I have found is that he says one thing but when you analyze what he says then it really means something quite different.


The only time I can see someone coming to that conclusion is when he discusses free will. My own analysis of his statements in that regard would be that he has a very roundabout way of saying, "I'd like to think we have free will, but I really don't know."
_________________________
Everyone is special in their own way, and by "special" I mean the short-bus variety.

"Recognize the phrase 'national interest' as a synonym for 'self-interest' and you will find no moral obstacle that cannot be removed from the highway of ambition."
-Lewis Lapham

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
-Winston Churchill

Top
#199757 - 11/04/06 04:15 AM Re: Wired Magazine/The New Atheism [Re: Evil_Eve]
TheAbysmal Offline


Registered: 09/22/06
Posts: 1024

From what I gathered of the article, these "New Atheists" are trying to prevent a raging forest fire by burning down all the trees. In my opinion, waging war against religion as depicted in the article would be as stupid as waging war against all the people of Islamic faith of the world in an effort to deter terrorism. The religion is not nearly as important as the people who practice it, and what their practice of it entails.

If people are falling prostrate toward Mecca thrice a day, why should I care whether it brings them and their own success in life, or prohibits their growth? I care about the beleiver who would strap a bomb to him- or herself in an effort to bring about much of the same results these New Atheists seek: their own ideology for the whole world, bar anything else.

Why not ban the production of any food that contains cholesterol because eating it is unhealthy, and your body produces it naturally anyway? I intend this question to be analogous. I speculate that such a ban would not bring about any positive change, and could perhaps be more damaging to the cause of promoting better health. The same goes for religion.

I think a better way of influencing people to adopt or identify with good practices over flawed doctrine is to simply make them known, and let the process of natural selection run its course. Is that not what Dr. Anton LaVey did?

Hail Satan!

_________________________

Refuse to die.

Top
#199758 - 11/04/06 05:34 PM The gaps [Re: Hagen von Tronje]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 12591
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
If you sometime wish to see references for the gaps in the various macroevolution theories I'll be happy to do so downstairs.

For the benefit of those reading this up here I will simply mention that two origin issues are far from resolved in any acceptable manner and these are the origin of the universe (if there is one) and the origins of the species.

The fundamentalist Christians have nothing to offer but, unfortunately, the holes in the various versions of evolution (macro not micro) are still large enough for truckloads of missing links to drive through any weekday.

There are still great mysteries regarding these issues with far too much extrapolation based on faith (with the creationists) and wishful thinking (with the evolutionists).

The Third Side of these two issues remains still outside the mainstream ... as usual.

Top
#199759 - 11/04/06 07:44 PM Re: Wired Magazine/The New Atheism [Re: Evil_Eve]
Unknown Offline
Unknown

Registered: 03/31/05
Posts: 1649
I found this article to be very interesting.

It sounds like it is promoting pure utopian nonsense. A world guided by reason and logic? Impossible as ignorance is needed for mankinds survival.

It has been demonstrated by the analysis of 42 research studies that religion does infact prevent medical health problems such as cancer, mental illness, as well as heart diseases. So inspite of how stupid the belief in their God may be, mankind has become fully dependent upon this concept.

For me, Satanism is as Boyd Rice once said, the pathway to God.


Edited by Unknown (11/05/06 09:52 AM)
_________________________









Top
#199760 - 11/04/06 07:58 PM Re: The gaps *DELETED* [Re: Nemo]
Unknown Offline
Unknown

Registered: 03/31/05
Posts: 1649
Post deleted by Unknown


Edited by Unknown (11/04/06 08:08 PM)
_________________________









Top
#199761 - 11/04/06 11:27 PM Re: The gaps [Re: Unknown]
Virus9 Offline
CoS Priest

Registered: 08/06/01
Posts: 2108
Loc: Florida
I find it amazing how swiftly man has evolved, especially for the past 50,000 years or so.

And exactly how much have humans evolved in the last 50,000 years?
_________________________
Everyone is special in their own way, and by "special" I mean the short-bus variety.

"Recognize the phrase 'national interest' as a synonym for 'self-interest' and you will find no moral obstacle that cannot be removed from the highway of ambition."
-Lewis Lapham

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
-Winston Churchill

Top
#199762 - 11/04/06 11:44 PM Re: The gaps [Re: Nemo]
Virus9 Offline
CoS Priest

Registered: 08/06/01
Posts: 2108
Loc: Florida
If you sometime wish to see references for the gaps in the various macroevolution theories I'll be happy to do so downstairs.

By all means, sir, do tell.
_________________________
Everyone is special in their own way, and by "special" I mean the short-bus variety.

"Recognize the phrase 'national interest' as a synonym for 'self-interest' and you will find no moral obstacle that cannot be removed from the highway of ambition."
-Lewis Lapham

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
-Winston Churchill

Top
#199763 - 11/05/06 09:34 AM Re: The gaps [Re: Virus9]
Unknown Offline
Unknown

Registered: 03/31/05
Posts: 1649
A very good question.

These are just some notes I am going to be giving you so bare with me please.

The human brain size 200,000 years ago was identical to ours. Humans remained at this standard state using the same tools for the same purposes. It wasn't until 44,000 years ago that suddenly there seemed to be a collective change in the state of behaviour in the human race. There was what appears to be a significant change in its activities.

We begin to see cave art to appear 35,000 years ago, rock art appears world wide. Hunting strategies that have never been recorded were starting to appear in caves. There were no physical altercations of of the brain 160,000-200,000 years ago just a shift in consciousness. What caused this shift is unknown. Darwinian evolution has no answer for this.

Sir Julian Huxley has made the suggestion that man has the ability under the proper circumstances to become the director of evolution, the power of engineering.

Also, have you read Supernatural by Graham Hancock? He explores this question in depth.
_________________________









Top
#199764 - 11/05/06 05:59 PM Re: The gaps [Re: Unknown]
Virus9 Offline
CoS Priest

Registered: 08/06/01
Posts: 2108
Loc: Florida
Darwinian evolution has no answer for this.

Evolutionary theory attemts to explain physical changes over the course of many generations. While some physical changes may lead to psychological changes, admitting that the human brain is virtually unchanged over the past 200,000 years shows that changes which occured roughly 50,000 years ago are outside the scope of evolution. Evolution obviously doesn't explain everything, and no serious proponent of evolution tries to claim that it does.

I haven't read Mr. Hancock's book, but I did a search for it earlier and found an interview in which he disscusses some of its subject matter in depth. While I'll likely get around to checking it out at some point, his interview left me with the impression that he's simply rehashing ideas set forth by Robert Anton Wilson 37 years earlier. It also left me with the impression that he is wholly ignorant of what evolutionary theory actually says.
_________________________
Everyone is special in their own way, and by "special" I mean the short-bus variety.

"Recognize the phrase 'national interest' as a synonym for 'self-interest' and you will find no moral obstacle that cannot be removed from the highway of ambition."
-Lewis Lapham

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
-Winston Churchill

Top
#199765 - 11/14/06 06:10 AM Re: The gaps [Re: Virus9]
Evil_Eve Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 09/23/06
Posts: 4234
Loc: 1313 Mockingbird Lane
I note that the topic of creation and evolution come up quite often on this site and do so enjoy reading all the replies/theories and Scientific facts posed.

Question everything, believe nothing.

I dug up This article from Scientific American written several years ago that was quite a good read and thought I would share it with the forum.

Many of you may have already read this article years ago but for those who haven't, enjoy.

_________________________
Satan LIVES!
If you could....would YOU?



"Our religion does not require martyrs."
Magistra Nadramia.

FEARED!
Revered.
YOU can be a voice for the voiceless.


Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >


Forum Stats
12253 Members
73 Forums
44034 Topics
406357 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements