Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME FORUMS BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Sep 18, 2014 12:42 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Ch. 10: The Tawdriness of the Miraculous and the Decline... 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Owner
Diamond Contributor 3

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 13944
Location: Florida
Thanks: 1922
Thanked: 731 times in 581 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)
Highscores: 10

Post Ch. 10: The Tawdriness of the Miraculous and the Decline...
God is Not Great

Ch. 10: The Tawdriness of the Miraculous and the Decline of Hell

[hr][hr]



Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:04 pm
Profile Email YIM WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4137
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1131
Thanked: 1184 times in 891 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post 
Quotes from this chapter

Quote:
prophets and seers and great theologians seem to have died out ...they ought to welcome the eclipse of this age of fraud ...Chariots in the sky ... speaks to the longing of every peasant ... miracle ... last word ... Hume ... possibilities ... laws of nature have been suspended ... delusion ... likelihood weighed ... report of the miracle ... odds must be adjusted ... obligation ... disbelieve the whole thing ... exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence ... encounters with spacecraft ... vivid and detailed ... huge new superstition ... Muggeridge ... launched the 'Mother Theresa' brand ... Kindly Light ... photographic miracle ... director ... going to say three cheers for Kodak ...sainthood of Mother Theresa ... scandal ... will further postpone the day when Indian villages cease to trust quacks ... Everything is already explained ... Argument from authority ... weakest ...ripping of the whole disguise is overdue ... sciences ... have shown religious myths to be false ... newer and finer wonders ...Marxist ... messianic element ... allow your chainless mind to do its own thinking



Last edited by Robert Tulip on Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Apr 09, 2009 4:42 am
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Do you believe in miracles?
Part A: If I knew how to set up a poll, I would pose the question above. But I ask it anyway. Can we agree to use my defintion of "miracle"? I suggest that a miracle is a) a feat performed by a deity or person empowered by a deity, the feat being seen as controverting natural laws; and b) a phenomenon that occurs without such specific intervention, but is unexplainable in terms of science. Examples would be prayer healing someone who doesn't know she's being prayed for, ESP, "channeling" or other New Age phenomena.

Part B: This is one of Hitchens best chapters, I think. I hope people will read it and discuss it. I will give a long excerpt below just because I think it brilliantly shows that, whatever the words "shallow atheism" might mean, Hitchens is not shallow. He tells us he has been thinking about this book all his life, and it is indeed clear that he did not get the idea from the three prominent books on atheism that preceded his. His arguments are too well developed and supported (my opinion) not to have had a long gestation.

Pages 150-151:

"The 'argument from authority' is the weakest of all arguments. It is weak when it is asserted at second or third hand ("the Good Book says"), and it is even weaker when asserted at first hand, as everyone knows who has heard a parent say "because I say so" (and as every parent knows who has heard himself reduced to uttering words he once found so unconvincing). Nonetheless, it takes a certain "leap" of another kind to find oneself asserting that all religion is made up by ordinary mammals and has no secret or mystery to it. Behind the veil of Oz, there is nothing but bluff. Can this really be true? As one who has always been impressed by the weight of history and culture, I do keep asking myself this question. Was it all in vain, then: the great struggle of the theologians and scholars, and the stupendous efforts of painters and musicians to create something lasting and marvelous that would testify to the glory of god?

Not at all. It does not matter to me whether Homer was one person or many, or whether Shakespeare was a secret Catholic or a closet agnostic. I should not feel my own world destroyed if the greatest writier about love and tragedy and comedy and morals was finally revealed to be the Earl of Oxford all along....Shakespeare has much more moral salience than the Talmud or the Koran or any account of the fearful squabbles of Iron Age tribes. But there is a great deal to be learned and appreciated from the scrutiny of religion, and one often finds oneself standing atop the shoulders of dstinguished writers and thinkers who were certainly one's intellectual and sometimes even one's moral superiors. Many of them, in their own time, had ripped away the disguise of idolatry and paganism, and even risked martyrdom for the sake of disputes with their own coreligionists. However, a moment in history has now arrived when even a pygmy such as myself can claim to know more--through know merit of his own--and to see that the final ripping of the whole disguise is overdue. Between them, the sciences of textual criticism, archeology, physics, and molecular biology have shown religious myths to be false and man-made and have also succeeded in evolving better and more enlightened explanations. The loss of faith can be compensated by the newer and finer wonders that we have before us, as well as by immersion in the near-miraculous work of Homer and Shakespeare and Milton and Tolstoy and Proust, all of which was also "man-made (though one sometimes wonders in the case of Mozart). I can say this as one whose own secular faith has been shaken and discarded, not without pain."

Hitchens goes on to talk frankly about his own one-time immersion in the secular religion of Marxism. This, too, is well worth reading.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:45 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One more post ought to do it.

BookTalk.org Moderator

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 3294
Location: Michigan
Thanks: 1230
Thanked: 976 times in 717 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Definition accepted.

It amazes me what will be accepted as miraculous, or supernatural.

Grilled cheese samwich with image of Jesus?

sold on internet for somewhere around $40,000 us. Proof of the devine.

Chicken grease from the coma girl's eyes? Miracle.

Statue with "blood" tubes to dispense from stigmata wounds? Pants-shitting amazement.

In a discussion with my sister about belief in general she brought up ghosts. Her eyes took on the glean of belief. You know that look. Eyebrows slightly arched, eyelids open wide, slight shake of the head in the negative.

She related the story of a group photo taken at a class re-union where there was a face in the crowd nobody could identify... obviously that was a ghost. How else would i explain that?

I said, "Simple. someone with a face was standing there when the photo was taken."

Why must we jump to supernatural explainations when "someone wandered into frame" is the easily superior explaination?



Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:14 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post God has been found!
Just recently, in Burlington County NJ, my neck of the woods, a woman sliced open a potato and wha, la, she found the image of a cross. God lives in a potato in NJ, we are all doomed.



Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:35 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
I can has reading?

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2964
Location: Cheshire, England
Thanks: 233
Thanked: 469 times in 363 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post 
I thought Jesus was reputed to have said,

"An evil and corrupt generation craves for a sign".....

What purpose could such signs serve other than to pander to superstition? I used to think that the best thing about Christianity was that it inured one to superstition.

Wrong again!!!


_________________
If you fall, I'll be there.

.....Floor


Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:21 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4137
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1131
Thanked: 1184 times in 891 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: Do you believe in miracles?
DWill wrote:
Part A: If I knew how to set up a poll, I would pose the question above. But I ask it anyway. Can we agree to use my definition of "miracle"? I suggest that a miracle is a) a feat performed by a deity or person empowered by a deity, the feat being seen as controverting natural laws; and b) a phenomenon that occurs without such specific intervention, but is unexplainable in terms of science. Examples would be prayer healing someone who doesn't know she's being prayed for, ESP, "channeling" or other New Age phenomena.
Thanks Bill, I think your definition only goes a part of the way to explain the miraculous. I take the view that nothing can occur contrary to natural law, which under your definition would make miracles impossible. We should never postulate that God contravenes the laws of nature, but I hesitate to abandon the concept of the miraculous to its magical origins. Acts of love and grace can have a miraculous quality, transforming people while remaining completely explainable by science.
Quote:

Part B: This is one of Hitchens best chapters, I think. I hope people will read it and discuss it. I will give a long excerpt below just because I think it brilliantly shows that, whatever the words "shallow atheism" might mean, Hitchens is not shallow. He tells us he has been thinking about this book all his life, and it is indeed clear that he did not get the idea from the three prominent books on atheism that preceded his. His arguments are too well developed and supported (my opinion) not to have had a long gestation.
Great point Bill, Hitchens is conversant with the main currents of human thought, and sets his own views in the context of wrestling with arguments for the existence of God.
Quote:
Pages 150-151: Behind the veil of Oz, there is nothing but bluff.
Hitchens displays a failure to understand the basis of religious thought with this comment. It speaks to the prominent modern American myth of The Wizard of Oz, which at a religious level is describing God as a human creation. America yearns for a sense of mastery and control, exemplified in its other great myth Superman. Oz reassures the sceptical doubter that the universe can be explained by science, and that all mysteries – failures of courage, brains and love – can be rectified through the power of positive thinking.

The problem with this ‘control’ version of religion, as noted by Bacevich, is that the dream of control is an illusion. The empirical rationality of western domination stretches from Wolfowitz, perhaps as far as Hitchens. A more humble view would acknowledge it does not see through the veil of Oz, rather than arrogantly asserting that God is bluffing.



Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:34 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
I dumpster dive for books!

Bronze Contributor

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1796
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 14 times in 12 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
CHitchens: The 'argument from authority' is the weakest of all arguments. It is weak when it is asserted at second or third hand ("the Good Book says"), and it is even weaker when asserted at first hand, as everyone knows who has heard a parent say "because I say so" (and as every parent knows who has heard himself reduced to uttering words he once found so unconvincing).

Authority can be legitimate or illegitimate. A parent grabbing a child and pulling them out of a busy intersection is imposing a force of authority...one that can probably be justified. A nation dropping cluster bombs over densely populated villages and cities is imposing another form of authority...one that requires a more complicated and difficult form of justification- but, in most cases (perhaps all) relies upon the authority of the generals and field marshalls who declare: "the enemy is there, and this is the best way for us to destroy them and protect our nation's interests". The nation bleats 'amen!' and the cities burn. Those who challenge the authority of the generals and field marshalls are called cowards, traitors, haters of the fatherland. We must trust these men to make the right decision, have the best information, and pursue our best interests: how could they decieve us? Why would they want to?

Ultimately, no matter where we place our authority, or from whom or what we derive our directives, it is we who establish the rank and order of power...it is we who say "this is my bedrock, here is my foundation, here is my truth and law for living and for dying"....pushed hard enough, all we really have is "because I say so".

CHitchens: Nonetheless, it takes a certain "leap" of another kind to find oneself asserting that all religion is made up by ordinary mammals and has no secret or mystery to it. Behind the veil of Oz, there is nothing but bluff.

The veil of Oz is too easily projected onto them: the other team, the other guy, those people over there, those tribes, that other party, religion, nation, school of thought, etc....we, us and ours and the way we do things around here: our group and party and nation are free of that nonsense and delusion...unlike the rest of those uninitiated, uneducated, unenlightened, unclean and ordinary- we have braved the tearing of the veil, because (unlike them) we are better, brighter, stronger. True, religion is made up by ordinary mammals...but, we, we are far from ordinary.

CHitchens: Can this really be true? As one who has always been impressed by the weight of history and culture, I do keep asking myself this question. Was it all in vain, then: the great struggle of the theologians and scholars, and the stupendous efforts of painters and musicians to create something lasting and marvelous that would testify to the glory of god?

Perhaps no more in vain as those courageous souls who have stood up to tyranny and despotism, abuse and domination, saying no to social injustice and personal degradation...demanding respect and care and honor and rights to fully participate in the structures and systems of power in their world...risking their lives and the lives of their families...struggling for a better world of ecological sustainability and economic fairness...perhaps all of this, too, is in vain: foolish and naive and dangerously ignorant of how power actually works?


CHitchens: Not at all. It does not matter to me whether Homer was one person or many, or whether Shakespeare was a secret Catholic or a closet agnostic. I should not feel my own world destroyed if the greatest writier about love and tragedy and comedy and morals was finally revealed to be the Earl of Oxford all along....Shakespeare has much more moral salience than the Talmud or the Koran or any account of the fearful squabbles of Iron Age tribes.

If Shakespeare was a closet Catholic...then perhaps there is something about the Catholic faith that permeated and breathed life into the 'greatest writer about love and tragedy and comedy and morals'? IF Shakespeare felt it necessary to practice and worship as a Catholic...it seems that would say more about his moral saliency than our ponderings of his value and importance. And why should we expect the Koran or Talmud to be understood or shared in the same fashion as Shakespeare?

CHitchens: But there is a great deal to be learned and appreciated from the scrutiny of religion,

What about the the understanding that comes from practicing and participating in a religion? In other words, simply scrutinizing religion will provide undoubtedly valuable and important wisdom...but at what point does the nurturing, tending, and cultivation of religion offer wisdom as well?

CHitchens: one often finds oneself standing atop the shoulders of dstinguished writers and thinkers who were certainly one's intellectual and sometimes even one's moral superiors. Many of them, in their own time, had ripped away the disguise of idolatry and paganism, and even risked martyrdom for the sake of disputes with their own coreligionists.

Here, the value of religion is best in disclosing its own abuses: in other words, religion works best where it confronts its own ignorances and misunderstandings. Hitchens is identifying the best of religion, at least here, in its Prophetic pathos of confronting falsehood, injustice and violent imposition of dogma and doctrine.

CHitchens: However, a moment in history has now arrived when even a pygmy such as myself can claim to know more--through know merit of his own--and to see that the final ripping of the whole disguise is overdue. Between them, the sciences of textual criticism, archeology, physics, and molecular biology have shown religious myths to be false and man-made and have also succeeded in evolving better and more enlightened explanations.

Found the light! Free at last!

CHithcens: The loss of faith can be compensated by the newer and finer wonders that we have before us, as well as by immersion in the near-miraculous work of Homer and Shakespeare and Milton and Tolstoy and Proust, all of which was also "man-made (though one sometimes wonders in the case of Mozart). I can say this as one whose own secular faith has been shaken and discarded, not without pain."

I am perplexed as to what newer and finer wonders have done to help us deliver ever more destructive forms of explosives and poisons across the globe...pumping more and more toxins into our air and soil and water and food supplies...terrors of war and ecological devastation have not diminished, but only increased...why we should trust or find authority in the 'man-made' elements of existence requires a faith at least as extraordinary and miraculous as our less enlightened forebears.



Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:31 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: God has been found!
deleted


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Last edited by DWill on Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:46 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: God has been found!
DWill wrote:
Suz wrote:
Just recently, in Burlington County NJ, my neck of the woods, a woman sliced open a potato and wha, la, she found the image of a cross. God lives in a potato in NJ, we are all doomed.

Hichens makes the point that God, or whoever is said to have performed the miracle, always does such piddly miracles! Why not something really impressive?


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:49 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Do you believe in miracles?
Robert Tulip wrote:
[. I take the view that nothing can occur contrary to natural law, which under your definition would make miracles impossible. We should never postulate that God contravenes the laws of nature, but I hesitate to abandon the concept of the miraculous to its magical origins. Acts of love and grace can have a miraculous quality, transforming people while remaining completely explainable by science.

I wanted to avoid the bleed-over that occurs when we let common usages back in. So many things are declared miracluous. Many of them may be wonderful and necessary, as in your examples, but I would say they are not miraculous at all, and that there are plenty of other good words for these things. Of course, religion has no monopoly over or necessary connection to these experiences.
Quote:
Hitchens displays a failure to understand the basis of religious thought with this comment. It speaks to the prominent modern American myth of The Wizard of Oz, which at a religious level is describing God as a human creation. America yearns for a sense of mastery and control, exemplified in its other great myth Superman. Oz reassures the sceptical doubter that the universe can be explained by science, and that all mysteries – failures of courage, brains and love – can be rectified through the power of positive thinking.

Well, God is a human creation, isn't he? Note that my statement only has meaning when God is the personal god that intervenes in our lives as portrayed in the Bible. Other notions of God, which are essentially non-theistic, don't apply here.
Quote:
The problem with this ‘control’ version of religion, as noted by Bacevich, is that the dream of control is an illusion. The empirical rationality of western domination stretches from Wolfowitz, perhaps as far as Hitchens. A more humble view would acknowledge it does not see through the veil of Oz, rather than arrogantly asserting that God is bluffing.

Of course, Hitchens doesn't say God is bluffing...that would require belief in him! And might he not agree with you that God can be a proponent of this control model? Or are you implying that he is a backer of the God-driven Wolfowitz control model (and this would be truly ironic). Anyway, an interesting and imaginative point.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Last edited by DWill on Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:02 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Gold Contributor 2

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4944
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1081
Thanked: 1040 times in 813 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
Dissident Heart wrote:
Authority can be legitimate or illegitimate....
Ultimately, no matter where we place our authority, or from whom or what we derive our directives, it is we who establish the rank and order of power...it is we who say "this is my bedrock, here is my foundation, here is my truth and law for living and for dying"....pushed hard enough, all we really have is "because I say so".

Although if it is "we" who establish the bedrock, we are then empowering an authority, which is the way it's supposed to work in a democracy. Ultimately, any argument from authority depends on the perceived legitimacy or power of that authority, sometimes on one alone, sometimes in combination. We all assess this quality when deciding whether to comply. Whether the authority is a god or or a government makes no difference; we will assess the authority's claim to legitimacy and its ability to wield power. Hitchens says that he has always respected the authority of history and culture, and that it is therefore not easy for him to assert that religion has rested on a false foundation. Look at all the brilliant people who had been involved that put him to shame intellectually and even morally. He makes his decision based on the legitimacy of the authority, which he has found wanting.
Quote:
The veil of Oz is too easily projected onto them: the other team, the other guy, those people over there, those tribes, that other party, religion, nation, school of thought, etc....we, us and ours and the way we do things around here: our group and party and nation are free of that nonsense and delusion...unlike the rest of those uninitiated, uneducated, unenlightened, unclean and ordinary- we have braved the tearing of the veil, because (unlike them) we are better, brighter, stronger. True, religion is made up by ordinary mammals...but, we, we are far from ordinary.

The boast you describe so well, if made by Hitchens, would indeed as you imply be the height of solipsism. If Hitchens or anyone else claims that there is an automatic positive benefit stemming from non-belief, I will join you in deploring that. To the extent that he might say or believe that atheists are less likely to screw things up or to be screwed up, he would be wrong. But I don't get any strong sense of that from his wiriting here.
Quote:
Perhaps no more in vain as those courageous souls who have stood up to tyranny and despotism, abuse and domination, saying no to social injustice and personal degradation...demanding respect and care and honor and rights to fully participate in the structures and systems of power in their world...risking their lives and the lives of their families...struggling for a better world of ecological sustainability and economic fairness...perhaps all of this, too, is in vain: foolish and naive and dangerously ignorant of how power actually works?

You're not saying this runs counter to Hitchens, though, I assume.
Quote:
If Shakespeare was a closet Catholic...then perhaps there is something about the Catholic faith that permeated and breathed life into the 'greatest writer about love and tragedy and comedy and morals'? IF Shakespeare felt it necessary to practice and worship as a Catholic...it seems that would say more about his moral saliency than our ponderings of his value and importance. And why should we expect the Koran or Talmud to be understood or shared in the same fashion as Shakespeare?

Well, Shakespeare's religion is speculation. It's not a solid that we really can talk about, nor do we need to in order to appreciate his plays. Hitchens' comment about moral saliency needs to be understood against the common objection that without religion we would have no guidance as to what is right or wrong or how to know the good life. In Shakespeare, Homer, Milton, Joyce and so many others we do have a treasury of moral literature that can serve as well as various scriptures.
Quote:
What about the the understanding that comes from practicing and participating in a religion? In other words, simply scrutinizing religion will provide undoubtedly valuable and important wisdom...but at what point does the nurturing, tending, and cultivation of religion offer wisdom as well?

I think you are assuming that he has a fight to pick on this basis. From his title, you would think so, but look further.
Quote:
Here, the value of religion is best in disclosing its own abuses: in other words, religion works best where it confronts its own ignorances and misunderstandings. Hitchens is identifying the best of religion, at least here, in its Prophetic pathos of confronting falsehood, injustice and violent imposition of dogma and doctrine.

A point for him? :smile:

CHitchens: However, a moment in history has now arrived when even a pygmy such as myself can claim to know more--through know merit of his own--and to see that the final ripping of the whole disguise is overdue. Between them, the sciences of textual criticism, archeology, physics, and molecular biology have shown religious myths to be false and man-made and have also succeeded in evolving better and more enlightened explanations.
DH wrote:
Found the light! Free at last!

He is not making the utopian declaration that you are mocking, is he? It seems quite al lot more limited than that to me.
CHithcens: The loss of faith can be compensated by the newer and finer wonders that we have before us, as well as by immersion in the near-miraculous work of Homer and Shakespeare and Milton and Tolstoy and Proust, all of which was also "man-made (though one sometimes wonders in the case of Mozart). I can say this as one whose own secular faith has been shaken and discarded, not without pain."
DH wrote:
I am perplexed as to what newer and finer wonders have done to help us deliver ever more destructive forms of explosives and poisons across the globe...pumping more and more toxins into our air and soil and water and food supplies...terrors of war and ecological devastation have not diminished, but only increased...why we should trust or find authority in the 'man-made' elements of existence requires a faith at least as extraordinary and miraculous as our less enlightened forebears.

I think that by "newer and finer wonders" he is referring to such basics as evolution and other discoveries of science, and is explicitly contrasting them with the the way that religion explained the natural world. These are not "man-made" elements, actually. I agree it's wise to be skeptical--or scornful-- of claims that we've reached a millenium through all of our progress. We still have a status quo that was no different when religion ruled and likely will not be different when it doesn't.


_________________
Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance that he himself has spun.

Clifford Geertz


Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Likes the book better than the movie


Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 825
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post 
DWill wrote:
In Shakespeare, Homer, Milton, Joyce and so many others we do have a treasury of moral literature that can serve as well as various scriptures.


Joyce?

The supposition that a literary education improves one's morals has no foundation that I know of. From personal experience I have found literary persons as a group to be less trustworthy than the uneducated.



Sun Apr 19, 2009 11:24 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Slut

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4137
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 1131
Thanked: 1184 times in 891 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: Do you believe in miracles?
DWill wrote:
Robert Tulip wrote:
[. I take the view that nothing can occur contrary to natural law, which under your definition would make miracles impossible. We should never postulate that God contravenes the laws of nature, but I hesitate to abandon the concept of the miraculous to its magical origins. Acts of love and grace can have a miraculous quality, transforming people while remaining completely explainable by science.
I wanted to avoid the bleed-over that occurs when we let common usages back in. So many things are declared miraculous. Many of them may be wonderful and necessary, as in your examples, but I would say they are not miraculous at all, and that there are plenty of other good words for these things. Of course, religion has no monopoly over or necessary connection to these experiences.
Fair enough, religion has so badly corrupted the concept of the miracle that it probably deserves a rest from polite use. Still, there is symbolic meaning in the miracles of Jesus which we don’t see if we just focus on the debate about whether they actually happened.
Quote:
Quote:
Hitchens displays a failure to understand the basis of religious thought with this comment. It speaks to the prominent modern American myth of The Wizard of Oz, which at a religious level is describing God as a human creation. America yearns for a sense of mastery and control, exemplified in its other great myth Superman. Oz reassures the sceptical doubter that the universe can be explained by science, and that all mysteries – failures of courage, brains and love – can be rectified through the power of positive thinking.
Well, God is a human creation, isn't he? Note that my statement only has meaning when God is the personal god that intervenes in our lives as portrayed in the Bible. Other notions of God, which are essentially non-theistic, don't apply here.
Hammering in the stake to the heart of the ‘human creation’ ignores the fact that it returns in another guise. A non-theistic Christianity, for example from Borg, Harpur and Spong, is becoming much more widespread. The idolatry of believing in one’s own creation is condemned in the ten commandments and the epistles of Paul, for setting up a control doctrine on the model of the tower of Babel.
Quote:
Quote:
The problem with this ‘control’ version of religion, as noted by Bacevich, is that the dream of control is an illusion. The empirical rationality of western domination stretches from Wolfowitz, perhaps as far as Hitchens. A more humble view would acknowledge it does not see through the veil of Oz, rather than arrogantly asserting that God is bluffing.
Of course, Hitchens doesn't say God is bluffing...that would require belief in him! And might he not agree with you that God can be a proponent of this control model? Or are you implying that he is a backer of the God-driven Wolfowitz control model (and this would be truly ironic). Anyway, an interesting and imaginative point.
In practice, Hitchens did align with Wolfowitz over the Iraq War, as part of his chameleon transformation from Trotskyite to neoconservative.

He does imply that “God” is a rather tawdry imaginative construction who can be seen through in the same way Dorothy saw through the wizard. However, framing God in this way removes the sense of absolute fate which has always been central to the doctrine of God. You can't just assume that the imaginative language is seen as the reality, when religious traditions are at pains to say that God is beyond description.



Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:13 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Upper Echelon 1st Class

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2467
Location: New Jersey
Thanks: 502
Thanked: 407 times in 325 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post ethics vs. morality
Hello Thomas, and DWILL:

Christopher Hitchens wrote:
". . . ethical dilemmas are better handled by Shakespeare and Tolstoy and Schiller and Dostoyevsky and George Eliot than in the mythcal morality tales of the holy books" (God is Not Great, pg. 5).

Thomas, are you speaking of ethics or morality? I find merrit in the authors mentioned by DWILL, and will add my own, Thomas Pynchon.

True, a well read person does not gain great moral wisdom from the books that she chooses to read. However, how does a literary person become less trustworthy? It is impossible to debate, or exchange opinions, or discuss topics with a person uneducated on the proposed topic, a monologue would be the result. It has been my personal experience to find the one man show monologue untrustworthy.

Suzanne



Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:19 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:


BookTalk.org Links 
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Info for Authors & Publishers
Featured Book Suggestions
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!
    

Love to talk about books but don't have time for our book discussion forums? For casual book talk join us on Facebook.

Featured Books

Books by New Authors



Booktalk.org on Facebook 



BookTalk.org is a free book discussion group or online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a group. We host live author chats where booktalk members can interact with and interview authors. We give away free books to our members in book giveaway contests. Our booktalks are open to everybody who enjoys talking about books. Our book forums include book reviews, author interviews and book resources for readers and book lovers. Discussing books is our passion. We're a literature forum, or reading forum. Register a free book club account today! Suggest nonfiction and fiction books. Authors and publishers are welcome to advertise their books or ask for an author chat or author interview.


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSBOOKSTRANSCRIPTSOLD FORUMSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY

BOOK FORUMS FOR ALL BOOKS WE HAVE DISCUSSED
Oliver Twist - by Charles DickensSense and Goodness Without God - by Richard CarrierFrankenstein - by Mary ShelleyThe Big Questions - by Simon BlackburnScience Was Born of Christianity - by Stacy TrasancosThe Happiness Hypothesis - by Jonathan HaidtA Game of Thrones - by George R. R. MartinTempesta's Dream - by Vincent LoCocoWhy Nations Fail - by Daron Acemoglu and James RobinsonThe Drowning Girl - Caitlin R. KiernanThe Consolations of the Forest - by Sylvain TessonThe Complete Heretic's Guide to Western Religion: The Mormons - by David FitzgeraldA Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man - by James JoyceThe Divine Comedy - by Dante AlighieriThe Magic of Reality - by Richard DawkinsDubliners - by James JoyceMy Name Is Red - by Orhan PamukThe World Until Yesterday - by Jared DiamondThe Man Who Was Thursday - by by G. K. ChestertonThe Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven PinkerLord Jim by Joseph ConradThe Hobbit by J. R. R. TolkienThe Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas AdamsAtlas Shrugged by Ayn RandThinking, Fast and Slow - by Daniel KahnemanThe Righteous Mind - by Jonathan HaidtWorld War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max BrooksMoby Dick: or, the Whale by Herman MelvilleA Visit from the Goon Squad by Jennifer EganLost Memory of Skin: A Novel by Russell BanksThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. KuhnHobbes: Leviathan by Thomas HobbesThe House of the Spirits - by Isabel AllendeArguably: Essays by Christopher HitchensThe Falls: A Novel (P.S.) by Joyce Carol OatesChrist in Egypt by D.M. MurdockThe Glass Bead Game: A Novel by Hermann HesseA Devil's Chaplain by Richard DawkinsThe Hero with a Thousand Faces by Joseph CampbellThe Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor DostoyevskyThe Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark TwainThe Moral Landscape by Sam HarrisThe Decameron by Giovanni BoccaccioThe Road by Cormac McCarthyThe Grand Design by Stephen HawkingThe Evolution of God by Robert WrightThe Tin Drum by Gunter GrassGood Omens by Neil GaimanPredictably Irrational by Dan ArielyThe Wind-Up Bird Chronicle: A Novel by Haruki MurakamiALONE: Orphaned on the Ocean by Richard Logan & Tere Duperrault FassbenderDon Quixote by Miguel De CervantesMusicophilia by Oliver SacksDiary of a Madman and Other Stories by Nikolai GogolThe Passion of the Western Mind by Richard TarnasThe Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le GuinThe Genius of the Beast by Howard BloomAlice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll Empire of Illusion by Chris HedgesThe Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner The Extended Phenotype by Richard DawkinsSmoke and Mirrors by Neil GaimanThe Selfish Gene by Richard DawkinsWhen Good Thinking Goes Bad by Todd C. RinioloHouse of Leaves by Mark Z. DanielewskiAmerican Gods: A Novel by Neil GaimanPrimates and Philosophers by Frans de WaalThe Enormous Room by E.E. CummingsThe Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar WildeGod Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher HitchensThe Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco Dreams From My Father by Barack Obama Paradise Lost by John Milton Bad Money by Kevin PhillipsThe Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson BurnettGodless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists by Dan BarkerThe Things They Carried by Tim O'BrienThe Limits of Power by Andrew BacevichLolita by Vladimir NabokovOrlando by Virginia Woolf On Being Certain by Robert A. Burton50 reasons people give for believing in a god by Guy P. HarrisonWalden: Or, Life in the Woods by Henry David ThoreauExile and the Kingdom by Albert CamusOur Inner Ape by Frans de WaalYour Inner Fish by Neil ShubinNo Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthyThe Age of American Unreason by Susan JacobyTen Theories of Human Nature by Leslie Stevenson & David HabermanHeart of Darkness by Joseph ConradThe Stuff of Thought by Stephen PinkerA Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled HosseiniThe Lucifer Effect by Philip ZimbardoResponsibility and Judgment by Hannah ArendtInterventions by Noam ChomskyGodless in America by George A. RickerReligious Expression and the American Constitution by Franklyn S. HaimanDeep Economy by Phil McKibbenThe God Delusion by Richard DawkinsThe Third Chimpanzee by Jared DiamondThe Woman in the Dunes by Abe KoboEvolution vs. Creationism by Eugenie C. ScottThe Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael PollanI, Claudius by Robert GravesBreaking The Spell by Daniel C. DennettA Peace to End All Peace by David FromkinThe Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey NiffeneggerThe End of Faith by Sam HarrisEnder's Game by Orson Scott CardThe Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark HaddonValue and Virtue in a Godless Universe by Erik J. WielenbergThe March by E. L DoctorowThe Ethical Brain by Michael GazzanigaFreethinkers: A History of American Secularism by Susan JacobyCollapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared DiamondThe Battle for God by Karen ArmstrongThe Future of Life by Edward O. WilsonWhat is Good? by A. C. GraylingCivilization and Its Enemies by Lee HarrisPale Blue Dot by Carl SaganHow We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God by Michael ShermerLooking for Spinoza by Antonio DamasioLies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them by Al FrankenThe Red Queen by Matt RidleyThe Blank Slate by Stephen PinkerUnweaving the Rainbow by Richard DawkinsAtheism: A Reader edited by S.T. JoshiGlobal Brain by Howard BloomThe Lucifer Principle by Howard BloomGuns, Germs and Steel by Jared DiamondThe Demon-Haunted World by Carl SaganBury My Heart at Wounded Knee by Dee BrownFuture Shock by Alvin Toffler

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOur Amazon.com SalesMassimo Pigliucci Rationally SpeakingOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism BooksFACTS Book Selections

cron
Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2014. All rights reserved.
Website developed by MidnightCoder.ca
Display Pagerank