Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Richard Dawkins and Peter Singer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    "Christian philosopher" is an oxymoron.
    Right, he has a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Yale.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by seer View Post
      Right, he has a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Yale.
      Then permit me to be a little more precise: Christian Philosophy is not a subject and Alvin Plantinga only pretends to do philosophy.

      “Plantinga states very clearly that the best reason to believe in (his) god is not a rational argument at all, but the infamous sensus divinitatis of Calvinistic memory, i.e. the idea that people experience god directly as a result of “an inborn inclination to form beliefs about God.””
      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
      “not all there” - you know who you are

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by element771 View Post
        Most of the population (Christian, atheists, etc) simply are not informed and have limited critical thinking skills.
        True enough.

        I challenge you to pick your favorite or the most "impactful" argument from the God Delusion and I am willing to bet that I can rip it to pieces.
        I will need to reread the book and take some notes about the arguments as its been several months since I read the book and I didn't take notes the first time through. While I am sure you feel you could 'rip it to pieces' I am extremely skeptical of your ability to do so in a way that I would find convincing. I have a degree in philosophy and experience in apologetics and have spent 15 years reading online arguments about religion, so and am very very very well aware of the standard pitfalls surrounding the various arguments for and against religion and what people do and don't argue, and I felt the book was very well-argued when I read it, and thus doubt you could make any argument against it that would be new to me and that I would find convincing. I am sure you could rip it to pieces in your imagination though.
        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
          I have a degree in philosophy and experience in apologetics and have spent 15 years reading online arguments about religion
          And he got taken in by The God Delusion.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Adrift View Post
            And he got taken in by The God Delusion.
            Not to mention his patent inability to even remotely accurately describe orthodox Christian beliefs. How much one has read is immaterial if much of what one has read is garbage and/or one fails to understand what one has read.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              you're just a regular moron.
              If I said you have the wit of an imbecile I would unfortunately be insulting imbeciles.
              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
              “not all there” - you know who you are

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                If I said you have the wit of an imbecile I would unfortunately be insulting imbeciles.
                Troll harder.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                  I have a degree in philosophy and experience in apologetics and have spent 15 years reading online arguments about religion,
                  What type of degree?

                  I had a bachelor's degree in biochemistry. When I went to graduate school, I realized that I knew next to nothing about biochemistry.

                  Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                  I am sure you could rip it to pieces in your imagination though.
                  Then accept the challenge.

                  Are you going to use the one about complexity coming from simplicity? the ultimate jumbo jet?

                  This isn't a worldview thing...this is a bad argument thing. It is not like the only people ripping on TGD's arguments are theists.

                  Furthermore, I am also quick to point out bad arguments for theism or I can list atheistic arguments that give me pause. Just so you know that I am being objective.
                  Last edited by element771; 01-11-2017, 03:17 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                    Not to mention his patent inability to even remotely accurately describe orthodox Christian beliefs.
                    It amuses me how often you nutters tell each other this and the absurd grounds you use for doing so.

                    Me: "You know that in some parts of the world most Christians are fine with abortion right? And that not everyone shares the US evangelical obsession with it?"
                    Various nutters on this forum: "He has no idea what orthodox Christian beliefs are!!!!!!!!!!!!"


                    I literally spent years studying the differences between different denominations and what different Christian groups throughout history believed and studying how and why those teachings changed over time and what the key arguments were in each period. And whenever I mention on this forum that there have ever existed any Christians who believed anything different from whatever a Christian poster on this forum happened to learn at their local church, they start screaming that I have no idea about Christian beliefs. It's pretty pathetic really.

                    Although such behavior is somewhat understandable given that this forum does try pretty hard to be a "safe space" for people with a very particular viewpoint on Christianity - any new Christian posters with the 'wrong' views are quickly banned from the Christian-only sections of the site and have their faith designation forcibly changed to not say "Christian" - so the site has developed into quite a self-reinforcing bubble that extols a very particular view of what Christian beliefs should be and does not tolerate any dissent from that kindly. So I guess I am transgressing that boundary whenever I comment that other Christians in history or the present have had other views or other interpretations, and thus people get upset and I am accused of "not knowing" the "orthodox" (i.e. TWeb-approved) interpretation/view. Although I regularly find it bizarre that my not agreeing with 'orthodoxy' is repeatedly conflated by posters with the idea of my not knowing its teachings. And thus there's this really strange meme that circulates around the nutters here claiming that I don't know or misdescribe orthodox teachings.
                    "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                    "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                    "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                      any new Christian posters with the 'wrong' views are quickly banned from the Christian-only sections of the site and have their faith designation forcibly changed to not say "Christian"
                      I don't know about this one.

                      I am a Christian.

                      I am also a physicalist (no souls)

                      I am also an annihilationist (no hell).

                      I am an orthodox preterist (no rapture).

                      I am politically liberal.

                      I think humans evolved from lower life forms.

                      The earth is 4.6 billion year old with the universe being 13-15 billion years old.

                      I am pretty much the antithesis of the stereotypical evangelical Christian yet I have never been challenged once.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by element771 View Post
                        I don't know about this one.

                        I am a Christian.

                        I am also a physicalist (no souls)

                        I am also an annihilationist (no hell).

                        I am an orthodox preterist (no rapture).

                        I am politically liberal.

                        I think humans evolved from lower life forms.

                        The earth is 4.6 billion year old with the universe being 13-15 billion years old.

                        I am pretty much the antithesis of the stereotypical evangelical Christian yet I have never been challenged once.
                        Heretic!
                        I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by element771 View Post
                          What type of degree?

                          I had a bachelor's degree in biochemistry. When I went to graduate school, I realized that I knew next to nothing about biochemistry.
                          I guess having any amount of qualifications is always open to the criticism that one doesn't have more. My phd is in a science field rather than philosophy and my philosophy degree is an undergraduate degree, but imagining I had done my phd in philosophy (which I seriously considered doing and was encouraged to do by a lecturer) surely unless I'd actually done the phd in the right kind of philosophy it wouldn't really have been relevant?

                          Then accept the challenge.
                          ~shrug~ I've just started rereading The God Delusion since people here seem to want to talk about that. In the preface, Dawkins lays out that his primary goal in the book is to help people realize that viewing themselves as an "atheist" is a serious option for them in their lives. He is concerned that there are a lot of people out there who say things like "well I'm a Christian but I'm not really religious and I don't really believe in God" who, due to social pressures or possible misconceptions about "atheism" haven't really even entertained the notion that they might want to think of themselves as an "atheist". He wants to take "atheism" from being an intellectual notion these people have along the lines of "I'm aware that there's this thing called 'atheism' and know there's some people out there who call themselves 'atheists'... but they're unhappy people with no sense of fulfillment in their lives right?" to viewing atheism as either something they already subscribe to or at least viewing it as a serious live option for people to be atheists in substantial numbers. To achieve this general goal, Dawkins is going throughout the book to go through the various hang-ups that people often have that make them feel that they can't really be atheists or that being an atheist is impossible.

                          That strikes me as an inherently reasonable general goal for the book. I live in a country where about half the population says they are non-religious, and where political leaders and average people alike are quite happy describing themselves as "atheist" when asked, so it seems an obvious matter of fact to me that 'normal' people can be atheists and that this is a possible way to identify oneself. But I totally understand that in some countries there is a much much higher percentage of religious people and many people in those countries don't really fully grasp that being an 'atheist' is something that is truly plausible for them.

                          Do you have an objection to this primary purpose that he lays out for the book? Sure it's not a "philosophical argument", but I feel that trying to read the book as if it were a collection of philosophical arguments is getting the genre wrong - I feel that what Dawkins is gifted at is consistently making really good observations and comments that are obviously true. The book, to my mind, is a very well chosen set of obviously accurate observations and comments that show that being an atheist is perfectly plausible. That said, those times in the book where he does touch on philosophical arguments, in the chapters about arguments for god, arguments on design, and morality etc, I do think he nails it, so we can discuss those I guess when I get to them. But perhaps you have some comments about his basic goal for his book?
                          "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                          "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                          "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                            I guess having any amount of qualifications is always open to the criticism that one doesn't have more. My phd is in a science field rather than philosophy and my philosophy degree is an undergraduate degree, but imagining I had done my phd in philosophy (which I seriously considered doing and was encouraged to do by a lecturer) surely unless I'd actually done the phd in the right kind of philosophy it wouldn't really have been relevant?
                            Not at all. My only point, and you should know this as a PhD, is that an undergraduate degree is a far cry from being an expert in the field. So to say that you have an undergraduate degree in philosophy doesn't say very much about being an expert in the field.

                            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                            ~shrug~ I've just started rereading The God Delusion since people here seem to want to talk about that. In the preface, Dawkins lays out that his primary goal in the book is to help people realize that viewing themselves as an "atheist" is a serious option for them in their lives. He is concerned that there are a lot of people out there who say things like "well I'm a Christian but I'm not really religious and I don't really believe in God" who, due to social pressures or possible misconceptions about "atheism" haven't really even entertained the notion that they might want to think of themselves as an "atheist". He wants to take "atheism" from being an intellectual notion these people have along the lines of "I'm aware that there's this thing called 'atheism' and know there's some people out there who call themselves 'atheists'... but they're unhappy people with no sense of fulfillment in their lives right?" to viewing atheism as either something they already subscribe to or at least viewing it as a serious live option for people to be atheists in substantial numbers. To achieve this general goal, Dawkins is going throughout the book to go through the various hang-ups that people often have that make them feel that they can't really be atheists or that being an atheist is impossible.

                            That strikes me as an inherently reasonable general goal for the book. I live in a country where about half the population says they are non-religious, and where political leaders and average people alike are quite happy describing themselves as "atheist" when asked, so it seems an obvious matter of fact to me that 'normal' people can be atheists and that this is a possible way to identify oneself. But I totally understand that in some countries there is a much much higher percentage of religious people and many people in those countries don't really fully grasp that being an 'atheist' is something that is truly plausible for them.

                            Do you have an objection to this primary purpose that he lays out for the book? Sure it's not a "philosophical argument", but I feel that trying to read the book as if it were a collection of philosophical arguments is getting the genre wrong - I feel that what Dawkins is gifted at is consistently making really good observations and comments that are obviously true. The book, to my mind, is a very well chosen set of obviously accurate observations and comments that show that being an atheist is perfectly plausible. That said, those times in the book where he does touch on philosophical arguments, in the chapters about arguments for god, arguments on design, and morality etc, I do think he nails it, so we can discuss those I guess when I get to them. But perhaps you have some comments about his basic goal for his book?
                            I have no problem with the purpose of the book. I don't have any major problem with his science. I am not entirely sure that I consider him to be a proper scientist. I know that people will have a stroke when I say that but he publishes books instead of peer reviewed manuscripts. Is that a proper scientist? That being said, I may be ignorant of how evolutionary biology is actually done in as much as this may be how they do things. If that is the case then I would withdraw this criticism. I do find it unusual for a scientist to not publish in the primary literature but again, this may be a reflection of my ignorance.

                            I have a real problem about how he uses science as a philosophy. What I mean by that is that he thinks that science is inherently atheistic. In one sense, I agree as science is based on a methodological naturalism. On the other hand, to claim that science naturally leads to atheism is a ridiculous claim.

                            Knock yourself out if you want to be an atheist but if you are going to be an atheist, it should be based on sound arguments and not the ones put forth in TGD.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by element771 View Post

                              Knock yourself out if you want to be an atheist but if you are going to be an atheist, it should be based on sound arguments and not the ones put forth in TGD.
                              Atheism makes no claim therefore requires no justification. It is a position about being unconvinced of someone else's claim.
                              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                              “not all there” - you know who you are

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                                Atheism makes no claim therefore requires no justification. It is a position about being unconvinced of someone else's claim.
                                Yeah I don't buy that.

                                If I make the claim that there are no apples in the barrel, you would be justified in asking me for justification of my position. Claiming that there is no God (A-theism) is a claim, even if it is a negative one.

                                I never understood this position other than to simply get out of the need for justification. I believe that any belief should be backed with justification.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                158 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X