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.



The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

ozarque got the book for Mothers Day and conducted a 3 post review-and-discussion here ff.  High quality conversation, as always.

mindstalk has a good review and short discussion here

Heliocentrism = Atheism
Over the past two days there have been several links to a blog contending, basically, that the Earth is fixed, period, and any other stance is atheistic.  We don't need another ;<) ; again, I'm collecting discussions.  The original post is, um, illuminating, but the responses there that I could get myself to read seemed to be primarily name-calling.  Many of the LJ responses were "Oh, dear", but there is some discussion of the problems the original blog represents.

 majkia   http://majkia.livejournal.com/347089.html

james_nicoll  http://james-nicoll.livejournal.com/828657.html

mindstalk  http://mindstalk.livejournal.com/72257.html

Comments

[jeffrock.livejournal.com]

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

[countrycousin.livejournal.com]

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.livejournal.com]

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.livejournal.com]

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.livejournal.com]

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.livejournal.com]

F 451 story (http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=4625303)

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.

[ohilya.livejournal.com]

Speaking as one who is not of any faith, but who loves studying them to no end, my thoughts on this, since I think it does merit consideration, particularly by people from the US:

The problem with congregations, or with any body of people who do not have official training in say, Bible Studies, is that they miss out on nuances, and apply incorrect methods of interpretation, understanding, etc., to such groups. The worst possible scenario is a literalist interpretation, that does not allow space for the notion that the OT & NT can be read as metaphors. Were such groups - these congregations - to be run by people who have had seminary training, and who responded to some higher authority, then I would be a little more relieved.

Thus, given that the current number of Protestant Christian Religions in North America is somewhere between 30,000 and 60,000 (with new ones appearing and vanishing every day), and given that none of them seem to be able to reconcilliate problems and therefore find the need to split over inanities and minutiae, it seems to me that the congregation system you mentioned is not enough. And it's not intellectually rigorous enough for my liking.

(It was to me, most delightful when the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad recently reestablished ties and reconciliated/reconciled pretty much all their differences, finally, after an 80 or so year split)

Anyways, those're just a few thoughts, from someone who finds this whole thing quite interesting.

And the F451 story is indeed most unfortunate. I find it troubling that parents of children think their opinion hold the same weight as those who actually teach within the educational system. Rather not unlike calling a lawyer to fix one's plumbing.

And that Dawkins thinks that empirical evidence can disprove G-d, he is in for a ridiculous battle, since he is rather missing the point. But that's an alltogether different discussion alltogether.

[countrycousin.livejournal.com]

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 <not safe for work> 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. Has a chapter in it that discusses the Prisoners' Dilemma Game (2 players can coooperate or defect. Payoff: both cooperate, good for both; only one defect, superb for him, disastrous for other; both defect; bad for both.) The interesting part is a discussion of what happens if one takes different strategies and assigns number of progeny as a reward, then sees what happens in populations of different concentrations of different strategies. Turns out that populations reach stable concentrations, but that the point differs a lot, depending on the initial population.

So - I regard "fundamentalism" as a very conservative strategy. That does very well under some conditions. Also, intelligence, and the capacity to adapt to different conditions also are helpful under some conditions. Each has drawbacks in the conditions in which the other flourishes.

Wonder if one could express that in some simple game. It seems to be expressed in RL.