tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146183364287787287.post2714709502513469870..comments2024-01-24T23:01:01.168+10:00Comments on Painting Fakes: Daniel Dennett Breaks the SpellJonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11272544252649766985noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146183364287787287.post-62772971233006354092011-05-31T19:00:53.778+10:002011-05-31T19:00:53.778+10:00Hi Sammy, thanks I agree. BTW I tried to post a c...Hi Sammy, thanks I agree. BTW I tried to post a comment on your latest post on The Scientific Universalist but it wouldn't let me for some reason.Jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11272544252649766985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146183364287787287.post-16403339892513948622011-05-29T21:18:45.150+10:002011-05-29T21:18:45.150+10:00There are several things that bother me about the ...There are several things that bother me about the militant atheists-<br /><br />1. They know little about religion. Yes, many religious believers are also ignorant of their own religion. But just because reading the Bible would make you more knowledgeable than most religious believers doesn't mean it makes you an expert on religion. <br /><br />2. They assume that because religion has been used for evil purposes that religion itself is bad. As you point out, the same doesn't seem to hold for Stalin and atheism. <br /><br />3. They assume all religious believers are ignorant or foolish. This one bothers me the most because atheists (rightfully) complain when religious believers stereotype them as being immoral or angry with God. Yet they have no problem stereotyping religious believers. <br /><br />4. They believe that science disproves God. Well, I'm a scientist and I can promise you that it doesn't. Science has nothing to say on whether or not God exists. Science is the empirical study of the physical universe. Since God is not a phenomena that we can empirically observe or measure, God is outside the purview of science. Yes, science can disprove certain religious beliefs, such as creationism, but that is not the same thing as disproving God. <br /><br />Honestly, I have no problem with most atheists. I care how a person acts, not what they believe. But I find the arguments of Dawkins, Dennett, and others like them, both weak and unconvincing.Sammyhttp://scientificuniversalist.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-146183364287787287.post-17161713656191595512011-05-28T18:15:24.478+10:002011-05-28T18:15:24.478+10:00Good stuff Ted. That's one slam-dunk for you. ...Good stuff Ted. That's one slam-dunk for you. <br /><br />Hows about writing your own book? "Breaking the Spell: Atheism as a natural phenomena." (I assume Mr Dennett believes his views are also perfectly natural. Or does he deliciously suspect they are in fact super-natural? A cut above mortal thought?) <br /><br />It does leave me wondering. Would mere naturalness imply his views are false as well? Can I boldly guess he wouldn't think so?<br /><br />It seems to me, if God is real, theism would be the most natural thing in all the world. Mr Dennett seems to agree. Does it follow that atheism is the aberrant and unnatural view, held by a few tone-deaf folk who lamentably can't hear the Music?Nurksnoreply@blogger.com