?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

From ozarque: Letter to a Christian Nation -- A Review by James Wood.

Sums up a lot of my own opinions quite nicely, actually, although I don't consider myself an atheist precisely.

-The Gneech

Comments

( 6 comments — Leave a comment )
frustratedpilot
Dec. 16th, 2006 04:34 am (UTC)
There was a piece on National Public Radio's All Things Considered today about the increasingly combative mood between atheism advocates and their opponents (mainly Christian Evangelists and Fundimentalists).

Hearing it brought out in my mind a line from Buffalo Springfield--

--Nobody's right, if everybody's wrong!

Politics have ruined religion for me, but I do NOT feel the need to antagonize anybody for whom religion really is good for them. In this country, it should be the right of every believer to believe, the right of every skeptic to question superstition, and the responsibility of everybody to let everbody else alone. The spiritual journey should be an individual and private process, unforced and unimpeded. Healthy doses of spirituality and logic are BOTH important sources for a person--important coping mechanisms--important tools for building individual ethics and morality. "One size fits all" in this human need has never worked at any point in human history. We need to be FREE.
himura_tiger
Dec. 16th, 2006 05:17 am (UTC)
Wow, long paper. X.X I'll have to read the rest of it tomorrow when I have a bit more time, but it's rather well written and the guy certainly has some good arguments. :-) I like how, at least in the part I've read so far, he's not being confrontational, just setting up logical arguments and such. :-)

It's certainly a good read and makes me think, thanks for sharing it. =^_^=
torakiyoshi
Dec. 16th, 2006 07:22 am (UTC)
It's interesting, but I find his apologetics weak. He makes the assumption that God can't exist because of logically invalid leaps from one idea proposing God's existence to the next which denies it. Carrying things out to their extreme end to get any result, for or against one's topic, is a logical fallacy. In essence, it's like a scientist setting up an experiment to make sure he gets the desired results, instead of setting up an experiment to see if the desired result is correct.

Granted, logicians on the other side do the same thing and often; I'm sure you can understand why I find this particular apologetic at this particular time disheartening.

Have the best

-=TK
packbat
Dec. 16th, 2006 03:47 pm (UTC)
I'm fairly sure this author, the reviewer, isn't particularly engaged in refuting anything. He's just talking about his own life and reviewing the books.
jamesbarrett
Dec. 16th, 2006 03:05 pm (UTC)
Wow, deep. Wordy too. I don't understand half the stuff he said. But then, I'm neither religious nor atheist. I'm a spiritualist. (as if I even knew what that meant too) -Frisk
packbat
Dec. 16th, 2006 03:53 pm (UTC)
You know, I liked the review, too. His anecdotes are interesting, and he recognizes a lot of the most irritating characteristics of these books he's reviewing. I remember "Why I Am Not a Christian" – the essay version, anyway – was pretty dry and bland when I tried to read it, and he nails the strangenesses of "The End of Faith". I haven't read the others, but what he's saying accords with what I've heard elsewhere.

I've pretty much stopped reading those kinds of books. He's right – there never seems to be anything new there.
( 6 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2019
S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow