Religion
Related: About this forumHaving criticized atheism, now it’s time to defend it against strawmen
Of note is that she wrote a story yesterday that was critical of atheism. You can read it here:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/time-for-atheists-to-take-a-hard-look-at-ourselves/
This is a follow-up
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/having-criticized-atheism-now-its-time-to-defend-it-against-strawmen/
AMANDA MARCOTTE
13 FEB 2015 AT 07:59 ET
Its one thing to say, as I did yesterday, that atheists need to embrace a philosophy of self-reflection and self-policing that religions sometimes lack. But its another kettle of fish entirely to use the Chapel Hill murders as an opportunity to take a bunch of potshots at atheists that appear to be rooted in a resentment that has little to do with legitimate concerns about fanaticism, which is what Christian writer Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig did at the New Republic, using this murder to grind the hell out of an anti-atheist ax.
I enjoy that she used one of the favorite denunciations that religious people lob at atheists: Oh yeah, well, youre so bad you might as well be a religion! Since people who do this are trying to defend religion, its odd that they consider it an insult to equate something with religion. Its a tacit admission that religion is silly and irrational or, to quote Bruenig, philosophically bankrupt. And sure, religious apologies do seem philosophically bankrupt to me, based more on wishing and hoping than on rational argumentation. But she baldly states that new atheism refuses to define its terms or ask what is worth inquiring, an accusation that is baldly false. Of course they do both, all the time. The God Delusion spends a huge hunk of its time laying out both why he thinks there is no god and why he thinks the question matters. You can disagree, I guess, but you cant say Dawkins refuses to answer the questions.
Instead she says its just a bunch of white guys:
She backs this up with statistics showing that its a lot of white guys. Which is true and no doubt a problem, but not for the reasons she thinks.
more at link
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)and self-reflect that the obsequious deference to any conceivable sensitivity of religionists to being offended, and their accompanying obsessive desire to show "See...I'M not like THOSE atheists" is a big part of the reason for bogus attacks on atheism like the ones that have been ginned up over the Chapel Hill murders.
But some people on this board just can't stop worshipping navel gazing.
rug
(82,333 posts)If we were all on a ferry we'd capsize.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I really like her and I like her take on this from both articles. She poses the issues in ways that really requires one to step back and think, not just have a knee jerk reaction.
I continue to see this event as a possible point of reconciliation between some believers and non-believers.
rug
(82,333 posts)The ones that don't, don't need reconciliation.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)long ago, because I see no hope.
But there are some in the grey areas, rug. There are some that are hostile towards religion but are reasonable and capable of seeing things from different perspectives.
For me, it's important to make the distinctions and to write off those who are not interested in any kind of reconciliation.
To do otherwise is to be just like them.
msongs
(67,441 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)conversation will be available.
There is no conversation when one person just drops a lump and ignores what anyone might say back to them.
Religion is not going to stop being hostile and murderous because mankind is not going to stop being hostile and murderous. These things occur with and without religion, as we have just seen.
rug
(82,333 posts)QED.