No, not at all- that's not what he's saying at all; nor have I linked for the mere purpose of being offensive.
First of all, many agnostics "don't believe", so it could not be the mere fact of "non- belief" that is being pilloried.
Secondly, many atheists do in fact have much more nuanced and mature viewpoints than he listed. Nuance and maturity is rarer than we would like, however, among atheists and deists alike.
Atheism is too often kneejerk superficiality wrapped in fake logical superiority, much as religion is too often kneejerk superficiality wrapped in fake moral superiority. It's the "too often" that is addressed here, not the heartening exception.
I applaud and post it because too seldom are the faults of conventional atheism examined by the nonreligious.
I certainly agree that no one aspect of a person can ever make them bad or good all on its own. At the same time, though, one can certainly facetiously point out the implications of a particular problematic behavior without needing to perform individual, balanced analyses on all who engage in that behavior. I have long spoken of the offensive nature of evangelism as it is often practised; that does not mean that all evangelists can be uniformly summed up by that well-meaning rudeness.
Not especially. I didn't read much past the post and the first two or three comments.
My husband is an atheist. I'm not. We've discussed both of our viewpoints and, amazingly enough, they aren't that different. Not when you peel off the baggage of perception. He believes in the world. I believe in the same world, only our ideas of how it began are different.
You have, as usual, defined things much better than I ever could.
How are YOU these days? Haven't see much of you for eons.
First of all, many agnostics "don't believe", so it could not be the mere fact of "non- belief" that is being pilloried.
Secondly, many atheists do in fact have much more nuanced and mature viewpoints than he listed. Nuance and maturity is rarer than we would like, however, among atheists and deists alike.
Atheism is too often kneejerk superficiality wrapped in fake logical superiority, much as religion is too often kneejerk superficiality wrapped in fake moral superiority. It's the "too often" that is addressed here, not the heartening exception.
I applaud and post it because too seldom are the faults of conventional atheism examined by the nonreligious.
I certainly agree that no one aspect of a person can ever make them bad or good all on its own. At the same time, though, one can certainly facetiously point out the implications of a particular problematic behavior without needing to perform individual, balanced analyses on all who engage in that behavior. I have long spoken of the offensive nature of evangelism as it is often practised; that does not mean that all evangelists can be uniformly summed up by that well-meaning rudeness.
Does that make any sense?
Reply
My husband is an atheist. I'm not. We've discussed both of our viewpoints and, amazingly enough, they aren't that different. Not when you peel off the baggage of perception. He believes in the world. I believe in the same world, only our ideas of how it began are different.
You have, as usual, defined things much better than I ever could.
How are YOU these days? Haven't see much of you for eons.
Reply
Leave a comment