tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post6308793122030007938..comments2023-09-24T07:53:50.826-05:00Comments on The Atheist Experience™: Why do atheists speak out? This is why.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-27020630958432255552010-12-22T03:45:44.544-06:002010-12-22T03:45:44.544-06:00What a fantastic article. I am jealous of your pro...What a fantastic article. I am jealous of your prose sir! I am now following your blog and wanted you to know that I am in London so your article is obviously reaching far and wide.<br /><br />Love.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-89310033468760095782007-10-14T15:30:00.000-05:002007-10-14T15:30:00.000-05:00Just a heads up that your blog post here was just ...Just a heads up that your blog post here was just featured at about.com's atheism forum:<BR/><BR/>http://atheism.about.com/b/a/259511.htm<BR/><BR/>Good job!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-11346297182743967032007-10-05T13:19:00.000-05:002007-10-05T13:19:00.000-05:00Firstly, I don't think the burden of proof is upon...<I>Firstly, I don't think the burden of proof is upon the believer to refute atheism. My view of God (largely influenced by Kant) necessitates that God's existence can neither be established nor refuted by science. It is transcendent. Science deals with the workings of the material universe, and God is not an element of the material universe.</I><BR/><BR/>And I just think you're flat wrong here. First off, the issue is not that "the burden of proof is upon the believer to refute atheism". The premise of your statement is false, in that it implies the <I>atheist</I> is the one making the positive claim that requires refutation. The correct understanding of the matter is that it is the theist's burden of proof, not to refute atheism, but to <I>establish the truth of theism in the first place</I>.<BR/><BR/>You also seem to have fallen into Stephen Gould's trap of "non-overlapping magisteria" in regards to this whole idea that God is somehow a concept that is outside the purview of science. You should understand that science is nothing other than the name of the process under which people obtain knowledge. Theists claim that God is the creator of all that exists. Given that claim, how can God's existence possibly not be a scientific question, and how can it be possible that "God is not an element of the material universe" if he is responsible for the material universe's existence? The theist who holds this view needs to explain, if God is not part of the "material universe," exactly what it is God <I>is</I> part of. (It's all well and good to use adjectives like "transcendent," as long as you explain what that means in this context, and aren't just using it as a synonym for "we can't examine it, so don't try.") And how does the thiest come by an understanding of that? If it's simply "faith," how is that any different than "I'm just making this up"? By what criterion do you establish the truth-value of a statement like "God's existence can neither be established nor refuted by science," if not a scientific one? (After all, like it or not, even <I>that</I> is a scientific statement.) If there is no criterion, why should I trust its reliability and verifiability? <BR/><BR/>Sorry, but I'm afraid that people who take your (and Kant's and Gould's) view of God are simply committing the special pleading fallacy.<BR/><BR/>I agree that what people do is, in the end, more important than what people believe. But if we were lucky enough to live in a world where everyone who held religious beliefs simply treated them as personal issues and made no attempt to influence or impose their beliefs on other people, let alone global politics and science education, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The real world we live in is one in which religious beliefs <I>do</I> motivate the behaviors of religious people towards others who don't share their religion. And that behavior is quite often violent and deadly.<BR/><BR/>While it may be true, strictly speaking, that evil acts are not necessarily a result of one's theism or atheism (though in the case of theism I'd say the risk is greater — Dawkins' assertion that theism alters one's definition of "good" and "evil" is quite true; look at the way so many religious people reflexively consider nonbelievers, homosexuals, and in many cases racial minorities to be "evil" just because of who/what they are), in the real world today, there are a number of people who <I>are</I> doing bad things to other people expressly because they believe it's what their God wants. Perhaps what we ought to be addressing is not belief alone, but how belief alters one's view of others and of right and wrong when that belief takes a fanatical, fundamentalist, dogmatic form. Just because one holds an irrational belief doesn't mean it's going to cause one to <I>act</I> irrationally...but it actually happens that way too often for comfort, and that's where the hazards of belief lie.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-39353175008037568422007-10-05T02:35:00.000-05:002007-10-05T02:35:00.000-05:00While there was certainly much truth to your respo...While there was certainly much truth to your response to the disturbingly close-minded pastor's editorial, I'm afraid I disagree with certain points you raised in your response. Firstly, I don't think the burden of proof is upon the believer to refute atheism. My view of God (largely influenced by Kant) necessitates that God's existence can neither be established nor refuted by science. It is transcendent. Science deals with the workings of the material universe, and God is not an element of the material universe. Thus science and God have nothing to do with each other. Stating that science supports atheism is for me the equivalent of saying that musical theory proves that cats make better pets than dogs. The one simply has nothing to do with the other. The separation of science and religion was championed by Francis Bacon (who was both a Christian and a scientist) centuries ago. He, like many great scientists since (Newton and Einstein, to name just two), realized that a belief in God, in and of itself, poses no threat whatsoever to intellectual freedom. Bigotry and superstition can manifest themselves in countless ways and I think it is unfair to judge all believers based on the bigotry of a few fundamentalist jerks. This blanket judgment of all believers as close-minded is not dissimilar to the religious fanatics' denunciation of all atheists as pedophiles and murderers. I myself have no objection to atheism. I realize that many atheists are motivated by a passion for truth and a real concern for humanity, just as I am. The only difference is that I believe there is a transcendent being, whereas they do not. I think we should forget the pointless squabbles about whether there is or isn't a God and focus on more concrete issues, such as ethics and morality. More important than who believes in what, is the question of who DOES what. And here I agree with the atheist's accusations that many of the worst of humanity's crimes have been carried out in the name of organized religion, especially Christianity. However, is is simply not true that these crimes are a necessary result of believing in a deity. Stalinist Russia was an officially atheist society and the human rights record there was not exactly outstanding. The fact is, neither belief nor unbelief is inherently "good" or "evil". I personally believe in God, but I have no intentions of committing genocide, suicide bombings, or any other act of violence in God's name. I guess my point is that perhaps atheists would do better to attack the real problem, which is not, in my opinion, belief in God. If atheists and moderate believers focus on ethics and what we can (and I do think we can) agree are fundamental ethical principles, then we have much better chance of actually fighting the real enemy. And hopefully we can move towards a society where a person's personal views on the existence of God will be largely irrelevant.MicrocosmicMysteryTheatrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303086078884344262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-62633314197183364062007-10-03T20:26:00.000-05:002007-10-03T20:26:00.000-05:00Jeez, Martin! Look at this thread! Way to go!Jeez, Martin! Look at this thread! Way to go!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-52745420010562630982007-10-02T04:01:00.000-05:002007-10-02T04:01:00.000-05:00You may notice that Terry says: "[Atheists] might ...You may notice that Terry says: "[Atheists] might just become one who lives inward, with no concern for the people or things around him."<BR/><BR/>This is one of the dangers of atheism.<BR/><BR/>Theists, on the other hand, devote their entire lives to God, and will never be distracted by the petty dealings of people around them. What the world around them is like is of no concern, since it's temporary and quite brief in duration. Other people around them are important only to the extent that they accept Christianity; if they do, your only concern for them is to make sure they don't doubt it, and if they don't, your only concern for them is to make them convert at any cost. After all, this life is quite short and eternity is forever; the only thing that matters in this life is whether you're a Christian or not.<BR/><BR/>That's why theism is clearly better than atheism.<BR/><BR/>(I'd originally intended to point this out as something you should have covered in your own post, but your blog doesn't allow anonymous comments and I don't like to go out of character as O'Brien.)O'Brienhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12159906614157119213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-1341922475002493982007-10-02T00:23:00.000-05:002007-10-02T00:23:00.000-05:00Well, considering how widely read and praised this...Well, considering how widely read and praised this post has become, I think it's been very effective. I wasn't so much concerned that the Arkansas paper's site publish my response as a LOC so much as I was hoping someone on their staff might forward the email to Terry himself. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. But so far, three other letters to the editor castigating Terry <I>have</I> been published by them, so other folks are ably responding over there. <BR/><BR/>My intent was always to take Terry's blather apart piece by piece in exhaustive detail, the better to illuminate just how wrong-headed and stupid he is. It's almost always the case that a little bit of bullshit takes a lot of detergent to wash out...and in the case of Terry's piece, it wasn't just a little bit of bullshit. That I've reached hundreds of other atheists with my rebuttal, and inspired many of them to respond to Terry themselves and be more diligent in general about the presence of ignorant scum like him out there, is good enough for me.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-78179392532997046582007-10-01T23:30:00.000-05:002007-10-01T23:30:00.000-05:00Why not condense it to a few salient sentences so ...Why not condense it to a few salient sentences so that the editors could print it?<BR/><BR/>If you condense your point to something brief and cogent enough to print and your response does make it to print, in a small but effective way, it gets a real (not strawman) atheist viewpoint some column inches.<BR/><BR/>You have a voice; use it effectively so it can be heard.apthorpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17152709906985093221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-32366834240775726982007-10-01T07:48:00.000-05:002007-10-01T07:48:00.000-05:00What is it about logic that creates so much fear i...What is it about logic that creates so much fear in the theist? I may never know the answer to that, but an even more puzzling problem is why they seem to be so good at logical fallacies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-57573250022008054082007-09-30T21:34:00.000-05:002007-09-30T21:34:00.000-05:00I LOVE you, man!That was the best diatribe i've re...I <B>LOVE</B> you, man!<BR/>That was the best diatribe i've read in a looooong time!<BR/><BR/>http://sluggabohn.wordpress.comUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07856310731294807403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-55748244461570696542007-09-30T14:23:00.000-05:002007-09-30T14:23:00.000-05:00"As for relying on the wisdom of men:"You neglecte..."As for relying on the wisdom of men:"<BR/><BR/>You neglected to point out that all religions require that the faithful rely on the <I>un</I>wisdom of men.<BR/><BR/>Good post, good points. <BR/><BR/>Was it published?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-29962453351474772532007-09-30T08:18:00.000-05:002007-09-30T08:18:00.000-05:00Fantastic post! I truly hope Terry and other fund...Fantastic post! I truly hope Terry and other fundamentalist bigots read it! I was reading this clenching my fist thinking "Yeah! Take that! Get in there!"<BR/><BR/>There's nothing better than seeing an ignorant arrogant fundie getting, for want of a better expression, his arse handed to him on a plate.evanescenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13737464017780390789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-30752297584702937192007-09-30T07:55:00.000-05:002007-09-30T07:55:00.000-05:00Congratulations. Excellent response that will pro...Congratulations. Excellent response that will probably fall on deaf ears, I hope they publish it.Sean Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14485575602984697926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-31660274318161725232007-09-28T21:00:00.000-05:002007-09-28T21:00:00.000-05:00What a typical atheist response......intelligent, ...What a typical atheist response...<BR/><BR/>...intelligent, articulate, reasonable, and yes Rev Terry, passionate. <BR/><BR/>Briefly about me: When I am not molesting children, robbing or murdering (OK, I want to know who leaked our club's secret agenda to Rev Terry!), I work as an occupational therapist in a rehab hospital. I chose this profession because of the pure, ingenuous joy I experience daily in seeing a person's life get a little bit better as a result of my work. The thanks I get from patients and their family members brings me a joy that far surpasses anything I experienced religiously as a xtian (tainted, as you pointed out, by the expectation of nirvana brownie points or the command of an invisible sky daddy.)<BR/><BR/>In my spare time, I paint and draw--two things I am very passionate about.<BR/><BR/>All this I manage to do, while still "believing in nothing."Phreemunnyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189147734376173498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-48201863270579223232007-09-27T17:58:00.000-05:002007-09-27T17:58:00.000-05:00Very good.I also did a post featured on my own blo...Very good.<BR/><BR/>I also did a post featured on my own blog Exercise in Futility and cross-posted at God Is For Suckers and I e-mailed it to Mr. Terry.<BR/><BR/>First I would print one or two paragraphs of his column, then I would respond to it, then post the next part of his column, and then I would respond to that.<BR/><BR/>Thus far he has not e-mailed me back nor posted a response on my blog. I think he is in a state of shock from all the irate responses he got from those of us in the atheist blogosphere. Keep up the good work!Tommykeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14751182125861177379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-68998310714783137472007-09-25T22:36:00.000-05:002007-09-25T22:36:00.000-05:00Well said.can I print this out and carry it around...Well said.<BR/>can I print this out and carry it around as a reference?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-52372803993641570152007-09-25T19:36:00.000-05:002007-09-25T19:36:00.000-05:00NAL: No objection whatsoever. We'll see if Mr. Ter...NAL: No objection whatsoever. We'll see if Mr. Terry hides behind his pulpit or not.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17933545393470431585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-67026723925771691292007-09-25T17:19:00.000-05:002007-09-25T17:19:00.000-05:00Well said. Well said indeed. A more thorough decon...Well said. Well said indeed. A more thorough deconstruction of ignorance I have not seen in a while. I'd been planning to write something in response to that particular article, but I think you've said it all.Micahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10089804369723326660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-92086099577466456762007-09-25T16:35:00.000-05:002007-09-25T16:35:00.000-05:00What he said...What he said...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15683748286518820448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-23150262992565204432007-09-25T15:32:00.000-05:002007-09-25T15:32:00.000-05:00Excellent post. Better than PZ and Revere. I email...Excellent post. Better than PZ and Revere. I emailed John Terry the text of your post and the URL, inviting him to join the discussion. I wanted to be sure he didn't miss it. If you object, I apologize.NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-89142332962057146182007-09-25T14:42:00.000-05:002007-09-25T14:42:00.000-05:00Maybe the fool does say in his heart there is no G...<B>Maybe the fool does say in his heart there is no God....but the wise man says it out loud.</B><BR/><BR/>Oh! My! Dog! The whole thing was great but this line in particular is just perfect.<BR/><BR/>You probably won't change that poor guy's mind but if nothing else you definitely put a smile on my face. Thank you.Saurian200https://www.blogger.com/profile/00670029633130988783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-30178376760818085242007-09-25T12:30:00.000-05:002007-09-25T12:30:00.000-05:00Blood drives? I bet you drink the blood of good Ch...Blood drives? I bet you drink the blood of good Christians, you nasty atheist, you.<BR/><BR/>Well done. I like the bit about virtue being it's own reward. Not long ago I was approached in a minimart parking lot by a woman and her daughter who were struggling with a flat tire. It was dark, cold, raining AND they had jacked the car up incorrectly and were trying to loosen the lug nuts while the car was jacked. Yikes. I was late for an appointment, but changed the tire for them, getting soaked in the process. But they were so relieved to be mobile again that they offered me money. I declined, saying simply that I was happy to help. <BR/><BR/>Even though I was soaked, had gotten my pants filthy, and was late for my appointment, I had made someone's life a little less crappy that night. I felt great. I helped someone. I am an atheist. <BR/><BR/>Screw you, Pastor Terry.bybelknaphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03374763910698149284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-59952456186945737882007-09-25T05:06:00.000-05:002007-09-25T05:06:00.000-05:00Great response. Unfortunately I think it would go ...Great response. Unfortunately I think it would go straight over his head. These faith-heads are indoctrinated to the point where thought is no longer necessary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-63024277272956501492007-09-25T00:28:00.000-05:002007-09-25T00:28:00.000-05:00"without restraint, he may become a pedophile, a m..."without restraint, he may become a pedophile, a murderer, a thief, or any other kind of a deviant you can think of." Because athiests apparently don't believe in going to jail.<BR/>Good Post!Davey G.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08827783872088603993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33241741.post-73233664446495586292007-09-24T21:11:00.000-05:002007-09-24T21:11:00.000-05:00Such lovely prose. I'm pleased we're on the same t...Such lovely prose. I'm pleased we're on the same team. :)Reeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12395302029627120927noreply@blogger.com