Is Atheism Irrational?

[Sleeping in EQ]

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com...ype=blogs&_r=0

[CardiacCoug]

Thanks for linking that SIEQ -- interesting read.

I'll have to think about that "you can't believe in materialism and evolution at the same time" argument some more. Seems like nonsense after a first read.

Deep down in my heart of hearts I think there is no God. #SJBH

[Topper]

Thanks for linking that SIEQ -- interesting read.

I'll have to think about that "you can't believe in materialism and evolution at the same time" argument some more. Seems like nonsense after a first read.

Deep down in my heart of hearts I think there is no God. #SJBH

How are epistemological materialism And evolution separate? I will have to read.

[wally]

If I were to be convinced that there was no God, I think that I would become a nihilist over an athiest. Nihilists seem less preachy to me.

[SCcoug]

If I were to be convinced that there was no God, I think that I would become a nihilist over an athiest. Nihilists seem less preachy to me.

Say what you want about the tenets of atheism dude at least its an ethos.

[Topper]

Interesting read.

[Jeff Lebowski]

If I were to be convinced that there was no God, I think that I would become a nihilist over an athiest. Nihilists seem less preachy to me.

Yeah, those nihilists seem pretty harmless until they drop a ferret in the tub.

[Blueintheface]

Say what you want about the tenants of atheism dude at least its an ethos.

Are they gonna hurt us, Walter? No Donny, these men are cowards.

Wally, don't be a coward.

[creekster]

Deep down in my heart of hearts I think there is no God. #SJBH

And I think many people are convinced based on a similar au fond du coeur feeling, that there IS a God. To be honest, au fond du mon coeur, I think this is part of what Paul is talking about when he describes spiritual gifts. To some is given to believe.

[CardiacCoug]

And I think many people are convinced based on a similar au fond du coeur feeling, that there IS a God. To be honest, au fond du mon coeur, I think this is part of what Paul is talking about when he describes spiritual gifts. To some is given to believe.

Yep.

[woot]

Every time I've seen an article calling atheists irrational, it relies on a fundamental misunderstanding of what atheism is and what atheists actually think. Dawkins had a whole chapter in his book explaining very carefully how he doesn't have a positive belief in the lack of gods, and yet here he is accused of just that. Even more absurd is a professional philosopher mistaking agnosticism as referring to the position that atheism and theism both have a 50% chance of being right.

Granted, these words both have various valid definitions, but as soon as you require atheism to include a positive truth claim about the non-existence of gods, Dawkins (and most every other atheist) immediately falls into the category of agnostic, leaving you bombing territory your victims don't occupy.

That interview is absolutely riddled with bullshit. This whole topic is quite tired for me, but that dude is very wrong on the internet. That argument about evolution being incompatible with materialism has me wondering who he was boning at Notre Dame to be given tenure.

[Topper]

And I think many people are convinced based on a similar au fond du coeur feeling, that there IS a God. To be honest, au fond du mon coeur, I think this is part of what Paul is talking about when he describes spiritual gifts. To some is given to believe.

I wish I had that gift. It has always been difficult for me to believe. The deep recesses of my soul both doubt and hope simultaneously. But belief is extremely difficult. You are a fortunate person creekster.

[creekster]

I wish I had that gift. It has always been difficult for me to believe. The deep recesses of my soul both doubt and hope simultaneously. But belief is extremely difficult. You are a fortunate person creekster.

I didn't say I was in either category.

[Topper]

Every time I've seen an article calling atheists irrational, it relies on a fundamental misunderstanding of what atheism is and what atheists actually think. Dawkins had a whole chapter in his book explaining very carefully how he doesn't have a positive belief in the lack of gods, and yet here he is accused of just that. Even more absurd is a professional philosopher mistaking agnosticism as referring to the position that atheism and theism both have a 50% chance of being right.

Granted, these words both have various valid definitions, but as soon as you require atheism to include a positive truth claim about the non-existence of gods, Dawkins (and most every other atheist) immediately falls into the category of agnostic, leaving you bombing territory your victims don't occupy.

That interview is absolutely riddled with bullshit. This whole topic is quite tired for me, but that dude is very wrong on the internet. That argument about evolution being incompatible with materialism has me wondering who he was boning at Notre Dame to be given tenure.

His reductionism of odds left me scratching my head, I will grant you that. I am still trying to follow his steps in detaching evolutionism from materialism. He is skipping a step.

[Topper]

I didn't say I was in either category.

My mistake.

I envy those with the gift of belief. I have wanted the comfort of belief, or at least the comfort believers profess to have. You appear to be a believer, so that was my mistake. I certainly do not have a positive conviction as to the lack of deity.