Fanatic links

[countrycousin]

Below the cut are some links to related not-locked FL discussions on Heliocentrism=Atheism and "The God Delusion", because some of the discussions are good (and related, in my mind), and I want pointers collected.

Comments

[jeffrock]

The two best reviews of Dawkins' book that I have come across are here and here.

[countrycousin]

Thanks for the links! I've just taken a quick look; I'll read more carefully in a bit. Did you read Behe's comment on Dawkins in Time. A masterpiece of polite restraint, I suppose, but I would have thought Time could have found someone less opposite who might have been actually able to say something without having it be immediately misinterpreted. I am no fan of Behe, but he was in an impossible position and it made the effort useless.

[ohilya]

This Brownback person feels the need to refute scientific theories and hypotheses not because they're somehow quantifiably & inherently bad, but because his faith is so incredibly tenuous. I wish more people could come to learn that faith without doubt isn't faith. It's fideism, and fideism is incredibly dangerous.

(Theology kicks ass. More people should study theology.)

[countrycousin]

hmmm. Do we suppose that Dawkins' God Delusion is a result of his inherent lack of faith in the scientific method? ;<)

One gets the feeling that thoughtful study might have helped many. There was the complaint about Fahrenheit 451 not so long ago that was pretty appalling.

I can't argue with your principle; I've never studied theology myself. They used to have survey courses (physics for non-physicists, etc); don't recall running into a "theology for laity" course.

[ohilya]

Being wholly and entirely unfamiliar with this God Delusion text, I'm unable to comment on anyone's lack of faith in the scientific method. As for the comment regarding Fah451, I'm afraid you've lost me. What was the context?

And I really do genuinely feel that if society is to feature a religious belief/different religious beliefs, it is in the best interests of both the government and people at large to be educated in topics related to religion, so as to be able to speak about X/Y/Z religions semi-intelligently.

There's talk here in Russia of organising a non-state funded (and entirely optional) after-school type education programme in Russian Orthodoxy, Islam, etc., so that people here could talk about their faith intelligently. (I think North American has something similar in the form of CCD, but I never understood the organisational structure of that programme).

[countrycousin]

F 451 story

I haven't read God Delusion either, but the reviews seem consistent that Dawkins thinks the evidence overwhelming that there cannot possibly be something like the God of Israel, Christianity, or Islam, and that belief in such has been and is generally not a good thing. Dawkins is a top-flight scientist. That sentence in my response was perhaps not 100% serious.

There are study groups here, often run by local congregations and seldom scholarly, although that varies locally and by sect. There seems to be some consistent effort to make them spiritually supportive; that seems reasonable, given one purpose of the existence of the congregations.

[countrycousin]

since I think it does merit consideration, particularly by people from the US:

Alas, the union of those who should consider and those, particularly from the US, who will consider is close to null.

Actually, in this neck of the woods, such groups often do have access to some trained people, and often include people who, although not trained theologically, are academically prepared. Alas, this neck of the woods is not where the problems lie.

and who responded to some higher authority, Actually, I have a problem with this one - I am no doubt a source of several of the Protestant flavors you mention and I don't even consider myself Christian. Authority can go Nonetheless, I agree, schism over inanities is bad, and religions that include respect for authority empirically last better than those that don't. That, of course, has more to say about Man than God. But I always intellectually welcome ecumenical advances. But I see them as the start of decline of effectiveness.

A book Dawkins wrote 30 years ago is The Selfish Gene.