tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post8226563632551572776..comments2023-10-25T04:54:37.147-07:00Comments on Just Right: The (not so) “new atheism”JRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10884491329536733335noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-1385645236920883262008-01-09T07:24:00.000-08:002008-01-09T07:24:00.000-08:00Hi JRIn that case the best of the lot is the Four ...Hi JR<BR/><BR/>In that case the best of the lot is the Four Horseman video at Dawkin's site.<BR/>http://richarddawkins.net/<BR/>Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens in conversation. Two, one hour segments. Very educational for me.doug newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03311921594856331794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-38502275560803531902008-01-09T00:12:00.000-08:002008-01-09T00:12:00.000-08:00Ok, some interest in atheism. Comments in turn:**...Ok, some interest in atheism. Comments in turn:<BR/><BR/>*******************************<BR/>KC, As an agnostic I’m open to arguments on both sides of the big, eternally open questions. Dawkins is a pretty smart guy, so I half expected his book might offer some fresh, original insights. There were none, but worse, I found his style extremely off-putting. He came off as arrogant, smug and contemptuous. One page near the front end was so chock-a-block with nasty adjectives I was tempted to stop reading right there. While there’s no reason to expect him to treat his opponents with kid gloves, treating them with contempt and disrespect does little to advance his own position. If anything it does the opposite. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, long story short, I thought Damon Linker’s essay accorded quite well with how I felt about Dawkins’ book.<BR/><BR/>*******************************<BR/>Ah, Red Tory, Why the surly troll? And the “point” should be obvious to one of your superior intellect.<BR/><BR/>*******************************<BR/>Joe, Naturally, I tend to agree. <BR/><BR/>*******************************<BR/>Doug, No problem posting links. I’ll have a look. Thanks.JRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10884491329536733335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-5125920680661035022008-01-08T18:28:00.000-08:002008-01-08T18:28:00.000-08:00And one more if I may.This is Harris making the "h...And one more if I may.<BR/><BR/>This is Harris making the "hard shots" about Islam that one commenter to Lineker's article suggests are never made by new atheists. <BR/><BR/><BR/>http://thesciencenetwork.org/BeyondBelief2<BR/>/watch/harris.phpdoug newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03311921594856331794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-40834304073060154792008-01-08T17:06:00.000-08:002008-01-08T17:06:00.000-08:00JRI hope that posting a link is OKThis is Daniel D...JR<BR/>I hope that posting a link is OK<BR/><BR/>This is Daniel Dennett speaking at Beyond Belief 2<BR/>Perhaps the other authors mentioned in the Damon Lineker article are more "brutally intolerant" or illiberal, but I don't think these claims apply to Dennett. <BR/><BR/><BR/>http://thesciencenetwork.org/BeyondBelief2<BR/>/watch/dennett.phpdoug newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03311921594856331794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-6262445639318115212008-01-08T09:13:00.000-08:002008-01-08T09:13:00.000-08:00Thanks RTI guess I'll start with Mr. Dawkins.Thanks RT<BR/><BR/>I guess I'll start with Mr. Dawkins.doug newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03311921594856331794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-90022341164347280652008-01-08T01:51:00.000-08:002008-01-08T01:51:00.000-08:00I suspect Joe has in fact not read Dawkins, but wo...I suspect Joe has in fact <I>not</I> read Dawkins, but would be interested to know what part of "The Blind Watchmaker" he finds to be "shallow". <BR/><BR/>Doug — The first question is very much a matter of opinion and your question would need to be more specific for it to be answered properly. <BR/><BR/>With regards to the second question, the answer is no, although given they are speaking to largely Christian audiences for the most part, Christianity quite naturally tends to be the focus of the criticism and discussion. In general their objections are most pointedly directed at the montheistic religions of Abraham (i.e., Islam, Christianity and Judaism).Red Toryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00422305796158017027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-63171253215618089602008-01-07T21:59:00.000-08:002008-01-07T21:59:00.000-08:00I am trying to decide whether or not to read at le...I am trying to decide whether or not to read at least some of authors mentioned in the article.<BR/>I suspect what Joe is saying to be essentially true, based on a debate I saw featuring Mr.Hitchins.<BR/><BR/>Would someone be so kind as to answer these two questions.<BR/><BR/>Is it true that Mr. Dawkins and co. offer no political perspective in their books, make no suggestions as to what would satisfactorily answer their complaints? <BR/><BR/>Is it true that that they restrict their atheistic or anti theistic criticisms to Christianity.doug newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03311921594856331794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-60281175174795571092008-01-07T20:39:00.000-08:002008-01-07T20:39:00.000-08:00Read Dawkins and I was struck by the shallowness o...Read Dawkins and I was struck by the shallowness of his thought. To hear the atheists Dawkins is one of the greatest thinkers of all time. I couldn't find one original thought in the endless drivel that he wrote. Heard it all before yawn.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-27197328198927013382008-01-07T20:27:00.000-08:002008-01-07T20:27:00.000-08:00What's your point? It doesn't appear that you have...What's your point? <BR/><BR/>It doesn't appear that you have one to make other than indicating you find the so-called "new atheism" to be "nasty" and "ideological." Care to explain why you find it to be so, or is that simply a remarkably lazy way of disparaging something with which you happen to disagree for whatever reason?Red Toryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00422305796158017027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5649264476699871612.post-29271744794550418582008-01-07T19:46:00.000-08:002008-01-07T19:46:00.000-08:00I've read both Harris and Dawkins and cant say I a...I've read both Harris and Dawkins and cant say I agree with Linker (who is also a secularist might I add). I dont see anything "nasty" or "ideological" or "intolerant" about anything they say. Saying that religion is a load of hooey is difficult to do without coming across as terribly offensive to some people. That doesnt mean they shouldnt say it. Whats more neither of them ever said anything about <I>forcing</I> atheism on anyone.KChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932623568330893522noreply@blogger.com