Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri May 27, 2016 7:17 am

<< Week of May 27, 2016 >>
Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
27 Day Month

28 Day Month

29 Day Month

30 Day Month

31 Day Month

1 Day Month

2 Day Month





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 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 Previous  1, 2, 3
Ch. 2 - THE GOD HYPOTHESIS 
Author Message
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Banned

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 528
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Ch. 2 - THE GOD HYPOTHESIS
garicker:...there is a strong effort by some to enshrine a particular variant of monotheism, Christianity, as the unofficial official state religion here in the United States. (He doesn't state this, by the way. This as my interpretation of what he is attempting.)

I think that is a pretty safe interpretation both of Dawkins' and the current political climate. After introducing U.S. secularism, Dawkins also compares religious influence in England with the U.S., claiming that for the English "religion under the aegis of the established church has become little more than a pleasant social pastime, scarcely recognizable as religious at all" (41). The description of religion as a "pleasant social pastime" is demonstrative of many of the people I know here in the U.S. And, yet, for the past ten years, the religious fervor of many elected officials has taken on a more fundamental tone. Dawkins offers a couple theories why this might be so: notably that the "religiosity of America stems paradoxically from the secularism of its constitution." That the fervor in the U.S. comes from competing religions with equal legal clout, as opposed to the one dominant Church of England, which dictates its religion. It's an interesting theory. Could it also come from the overwhelming and distorted influence the religious right has in elections, as opposed to a manifestation of how religion is valued among U.S. citizens as a whole?




Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:28 pm
Profile
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
Stupendously Brilliant


Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 706
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified
Country: Ireland (ie)

Post --
PORN, as in pornography. Not that my blog actually has any porn. I just wanted to see who'd click the link. I really must change it some day.




Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:12 pm
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
The Pope of Literature


Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2553
Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
Rose: As for how Christians try to justify the Treaty of Tripoli, or the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, or Madison's writings, or Jefferson's writings, or a host of Supreme Court decisions when claiming the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation is unclear to me. I've never heard a sound, reasoned argument to justify this claim.

It's slow reading, but a good candidate for the best explanation (by analogy) would probably be Paul Veyne's "Did the Greeks Believe Their Myths".




Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:44 am
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Banned

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 528
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
Leave it to you, Mad, to come up with a book for that question...::09

Now I'm going have to, at least, look up that title. I just can't see where the argument could be truly convincing. Sooner or later I'll open my mind to the possibility and look up the book.




Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:36 am
Profile
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
Professor

Silver Contributor

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 3542
Location: NJ
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 14 times in 10 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
I have that book. I tried to start it once, but put it down.

I did not, from perusing it, see how it would offer any explanation to the foudning of the US constitution.

Mr. P.


I'm not saying it's usual for people to do those things but I(with the permission of God) have raised a dog from the dead and healed many people from all sorts of ailments. - Asana Boditharta (former booktalk troll)

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

What is all this shit about Angels? Have you heard this? 3 out of 4 people believe in Angels. Are you F****** STUPID? Has everybody lost their mind? - George Carlin

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper




Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:04 pm
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Banned

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 528
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
I think Mad was offering the title as an explanation of how people justify claims that the U.S. was intended to be a Christian nation. Does that make more sense, Mr.P.?




Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:51 am
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
The Pope of Literature


Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2553
Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
To be more exact, I was offering the book as an explanation for how people reconcile Christian doctrine and their civic faith -- that is, their conviction that the values and ideals set forth by various canonized American documents are comendable as a way of life -- particularly when the Christian and civic faiths come into apparant conflict. "Did the Greeks Believe In Their Myths?" is the long answer. The paraphrased answer would be that people are prone to believing contradictory things depending on the context of their behavior at that moment, and that most of the time they transition between those contexts so fluidly that they rarely feel the need to reconcile them.




Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:30 pm
Profile
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
Professor

Silver Contributor

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 3542
Location: NJ
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 14 times in 10 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
Quote:
The paraphrased answer would be that people are prone to believing contradictory things depending on the context of their behavior at that moment, and that most of the time they transition between those contexts so fluidly that they rarely feel the need to reconcile them.


And this many of us classify as delusional behavior. And please explain "context of their behavior at that moment".

Thanks,
Mr. P.


I'm not saying it's usual for people to do those things but I(with the permission of God) have raised a dog from the dead and healed many people from all sorts of ailments. - Asana Boditharta (former booktalk troll)

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

What is all this shit about Angels? Have you heard this? 3 out of 4 people believe in Angels. Are you F****** STUPID? Has everybody lost their mind? - George Carlin

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper




Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:37 pm
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
The Pope of Literature


Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2553
Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Ridicule, Malice and What Matters about God
me: The paraphrased answer would be that people are prone to believing contradictory things depending on the context of their behavior at that moment, and that most of the time they transition between those contexts so fluidly that they rarely feel the need to reconcile them.
Mr P.: And this many of us classify as delusional behavior.

You can classify it however you want. Psychology shows this to be pretty typical behavior for just about everyone.

And please explain "context of their behavior at that moment".

It's all about how you categorize what you're doing. We don't always articulate it, but most of us behave as though our actions were easily compartmentalized from one another. So a lawyer may behave one way in his home life, and in a contradictory way while practicing law, and will feel no particular need to reconcile the two unless the congnitive walls of those two compartments break down for some reason.

To give a more pertinent example, a practicing scientist can believe in God whenever that belief is operative -- at church, say, or on a hike -- but suspend that belief when it's unnecessary -- eg. when he's looking for natural causes to laboratory phenomenon.

George Steiner has pointed out ("In Bluebeard's Castle") that one of the most startling aspects of monotheism is the claim to absolute importance that it makes. He characterizes it as an impossible ideal, but one with an obvious attraction (obvious because, well, look how many monotheists there are). Paul Veyne's book would seem to suggest that that sort of absolutism is alien to the way humans usually handle their beliefs, and that seems to bear out in our observations of monotheists. Some of them are damn intent on not compartmentalizing their beliefs, but few, if any, actually attain that ideal.




Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:55 pm
Profile
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
Sophomore

Bronze Contributor 2

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 259
Location: San Francisco, CA
Thanks: 1
Thanked: 15 times in 13 posts
Gender: Male

Post chapter 2
garicker, that was a great synopsis of the chapter. Thanks! ::80

did you have any specific suggestions on how Dawkins might have organized it better?




Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:09 am
Profile YIM
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Junior

Gold Contributor

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 311
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 3 times in 3 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: chapter 2
Ginof: garicker, that was a great synopsis of the chapter. Thanks!

You're welcome. I just had to go back and reread it to refresh my memory. :)

did you have any specific suggestions on how Dawkins might have organized it better?

I think he might have been better served to have organized the material into two chapters--one that dealt specifically with religious approaches to the god hypothesis and another that dealt with agnosticism, NOMA and some of the other issues he raised.

Of course, it's always easy to pick another writer's work apart, and, as I noted, I think the chapter is useful. I just had the feeling it was rushed, as though Dawkins was anxious to get to other matters and consequently was giving only cursory attention to some areas that deserved more thorough treatment.

George

"Godlessness is not about denying the existence of nonsensical beings. It is the starting point for living life without them."

Godless in America by George A. Ricker




Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:13 am
Profile WWW
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
The Pope of Literature


Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2553
Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender: None specified

Post Re:
You know, looking back, I think that is the quote I was responding to, but it doesn't say what I thought it said. What I thought you were asking is, how do some Christians reconcile their historical, moral and cosmological beliefs with some of the political demands they make. How I got that out of the quoted text is beyond me. I must have been pretty hungry or tired at the time.




Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:22 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 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 Previous  1, 2, 3



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


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:




Featured Books

Books by New Authors


*

FACTS is a select group of active BookTalk.org members passionate about promoting Freethought, Atheism, Critical Thinking and Science.

Apply to join FACTS
See who else is in FACTS







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.



Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2016. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank