-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Atheism
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/atheism-is-a-broad-church-20100316-qclu.html
Atheism is a broad church
March 17, 2010
Comments 92
WHAT were we going to talk about all weekend? Nothing? Could we scientifically prove the existence of Richard Dawkins? What does an atheist scream during sex? "Truth, evidence and reason?" We'd heard them all.
We atheists were in heaven at the Rise of Atheism Convention held last weekend. More than 2500 people, who for many years had felt like the only atheist in the village, were suddenly luxuriating in a free-thinking soup. There were enough people who looked like Trekkies and scoutmasters for The Chaser boys to say, "Welcome to the Global Atheist Convention, or Revenge Of The Nerds 4,'' and for all of us to laugh.
There were loads of great lines. I loved Sue-Ann Post's take about religion being like going without the lobster in favour of the invisible dessert; A. C. Grayling's "Religion and science have a common ancestor - ignorance"; Dan Barker, ex-minister, now atheist, who spoke about his debate with Cardinal George Pell.
"The debate topic was 'Without God we are Nothing.' Maybe without God he is nothing."
Funniest line of the weekend? "Here's a two-word argument against religion: Senator Fielding,'' from ABC's science guy and confessed ''congregational hedonist'' Robin Williams. He was referencing Fielding's appearance with Dawkins on Q and A last week. Watching Fielding, a creationist, speak, Dawkins looked as if he was witnessing a talking cat.
And no, we didn't all agree on everything. But we were all open to rational debate.
When any topic is off limits for rational thought and critical analysis, it infects the way we think about everything.
Becoming an atheist, I've become fascinated by religion. When I was a believer I was very uncomfortable discussing or reading about religion because so much of what I read conflicted with my fundamental beliefs.
When you no longer believe, it's fascinating to look under the bonnet and see how it all works.
There weren't enough women in the line-up. But the percentage and the gravitas of tasks given to them was far greater than usual.
Sure, there was a ''women's panel''. But Sue-Ann Post was the opening act, and I was the closing act on the opening night. And Taslima Nasrin, who now lives in exile due to religious persecution, was a highlight.
Educator and sceptic Kylie Sturgess introduced Dawkins to the stage. I wondered how many times he'd been introduced by a woman.
Leslie Cannold and Jane Caro and I have decided to address the common refrain of ''We couldn't find any women to speak'' by setting up a website called No Chicks No Excuse, with a list of women speakers on diverse topics.
Here are some questions atheists are frequently asked:
What do you actually believe in? Truth.
Isn't atheism just another religion? No. A religion believes in supernatural power. Sure, Dawkins is super and natural - but he's not supernatural.
When I asked what the difference was between a religion and a cult, someone replied "a good accountant''.
The ''atheism is a religion'' question is best answered by the Non-Stamp Collector, a YouTube animator who says: "Saying atheism is a religion is like saying not collecting stamps is a hobby, off is a TV channel or bald is a hair colour".
Why are you atheists so angry? If beauty is in the eye of the beholder then anger is in the sphincter of those people whose beliefs are being confronted. No one who agrees with Dawkins has ever called him strident.
The word ''militant'' has become synonymous with atheist. Militant is simply a word used to describe someone showing opposition in a way the people being opposed don't like.
And yes, atheists have killed, tortured, lied and stolen - never in the name of atheism, but because they're bad.
Jews, Muslims, Christians and atheists are generally moral people. But that's not because they're Jews, Muslims, Christians or atheist. It's because they're people.
I do hate. I hate religion taking credit for most people's innate goodness.
Atheism is a broad church
March 17, 2010
Comments 92
WHAT were we going to talk about all weekend? Nothing? Could we scientifically prove the existence of Richard Dawkins? What does an atheist scream during sex? "Truth, evidence and reason?" We'd heard them all.
We atheists were in heaven at the Rise of Atheism Convention held last weekend. More than 2500 people, who for many years had felt like the only atheist in the village, were suddenly luxuriating in a free-thinking soup. There were enough people who looked like Trekkies and scoutmasters for The Chaser boys to say, "Welcome to the Global Atheist Convention, or Revenge Of The Nerds 4,'' and for all of us to laugh.
There were loads of great lines. I loved Sue-Ann Post's take about religion being like going without the lobster in favour of the invisible dessert; A. C. Grayling's "Religion and science have a common ancestor - ignorance"; Dan Barker, ex-minister, now atheist, who spoke about his debate with Cardinal George Pell.
"The debate topic was 'Without God we are Nothing.' Maybe without God he is nothing."
Funniest line of the weekend? "Here's a two-word argument against religion: Senator Fielding,'' from ABC's science guy and confessed ''congregational hedonist'' Robin Williams. He was referencing Fielding's appearance with Dawkins on Q and A last week. Watching Fielding, a creationist, speak, Dawkins looked as if he was witnessing a talking cat.
And no, we didn't all agree on everything. But we were all open to rational debate.
When any topic is off limits for rational thought and critical analysis, it infects the way we think about everything.
Becoming an atheist, I've become fascinated by religion. When I was a believer I was very uncomfortable discussing or reading about religion because so much of what I read conflicted with my fundamental beliefs.
When you no longer believe, it's fascinating to look under the bonnet and see how it all works.
There weren't enough women in the line-up. But the percentage and the gravitas of tasks given to them was far greater than usual.
Sure, there was a ''women's panel''. But Sue-Ann Post was the opening act, and I was the closing act on the opening night. And Taslima Nasrin, who now lives in exile due to religious persecution, was a highlight.
Educator and sceptic Kylie Sturgess introduced Dawkins to the stage. I wondered how many times he'd been introduced by a woman.
Leslie Cannold and Jane Caro and I have decided to address the common refrain of ''We couldn't find any women to speak'' by setting up a website called No Chicks No Excuse, with a list of women speakers on diverse topics.
Here are some questions atheists are frequently asked:
What do you actually believe in? Truth.
Isn't atheism just another religion? No. A religion believes in supernatural power. Sure, Dawkins is super and natural - but he's not supernatural.
When I asked what the difference was between a religion and a cult, someone replied "a good accountant''.
The ''atheism is a religion'' question is best answered by the Non-Stamp Collector, a YouTube animator who says: "Saying atheism is a religion is like saying not collecting stamps is a hobby, off is a TV channel or bald is a hair colour".
Why are you atheists so angry? If beauty is in the eye of the beholder then anger is in the sphincter of those people whose beliefs are being confronted. No one who agrees with Dawkins has ever called him strident.
The word ''militant'' has become synonymous with atheist. Militant is simply a word used to describe someone showing opposition in a way the people being opposed don't like.
And yes, atheists have killed, tortured, lied and stolen - never in the name of atheism, but because they're bad.
Jews, Muslims, Christians and atheists are generally moral people. But that's not because they're Jews, Muslims, Christians or atheist. It's because they're people.
I do hate. I hate religion taking credit for most people's innate goodness.
found reading the post match analysis articles on the convention quite interesting, in particular a some on the humour and interaction of the crowd.
A couple were critical of some of the humour of the event, saying it was silly and mean at times. Main instances raised of course were the earthworm comment on Fielding, the Nazi line on the Pope, and saying they would speak slowly so those who believe in faith in the crowd could understand them.
Personally I have no issue with this. Its humour for a specific crowd, and sure some will work and some won't. More importantly, its nothing worse than has been said about athiests by those of faith (i.e. that well worn out line about being a monkey).
Also as someone who found the South Park ep involving Dawkins very funny, I'd be a hypocrite to knock their chance to get some payback (although I agree that one day the age of humans will end, and the otters will take over!!)
One part I did find interesting was the "what next" discussion. Some listeners came out saying things like the conference encouraged them to be less tolerant of those with faith from now on. If this were to happen, I'd be disappointed. We have a society were tolerance of differences in race, culture, and belief is encouraged, and enough people are already trying to chip away at this.
I did like however the call to make the Athiest movement more issue focused on outcomes for Athiests (i.e. less/no funding for religious schools, end to church tax breaks, enforcement of split between church and state, etc). I think this would be an interesting move, and may get the movement much more support (reckon a lot of these structures are losing support not just amongst athiests, but more and more the general public).
Couldn't go due to a scheduling conflict, but I'd be interested to hear how anyone found it first hand.
A couple were critical of some of the humour of the event, saying it was silly and mean at times. Main instances raised of course were the earthworm comment on Fielding, the Nazi line on the Pope, and saying they would speak slowly so those who believe in faith in the crowd could understand them.
Personally I have no issue with this. Its humour for a specific crowd, and sure some will work and some won't. More importantly, its nothing worse than has been said about athiests by those of faith (i.e. that well worn out line about being a monkey).
Also as someone who found the South Park ep involving Dawkins very funny, I'd be a hypocrite to knock their chance to get some payback (although I agree that one day the age of humans will end, and the otters will take over!!)
One part I did find interesting was the "what next" discussion. Some listeners came out saying things like the conference encouraged them to be less tolerant of those with faith from now on. If this were to happen, I'd be disappointed. We have a society were tolerance of differences in race, culture, and belief is encouraged, and enough people are already trying to chip away at this.
I did like however the call to make the Athiest movement more issue focused on outcomes for Athiests (i.e. less/no funding for religious schools, end to church tax breaks, enforcement of split between church and state, etc). I think this would be an interesting move, and may get the movement much more support (reckon a lot of these structures are losing support not just amongst athiests, but more and more the general public).
Couldn't go due to a scheduling conflict, but I'd be interested to hear how anyone found it first hand.
Didn't you realise that the primitive earth was similar in makeup to a sealed jar of peanut butter?
I'm pretty much an Atheist.
My parents didn't force religion down my throat or told me to hate other people if they are a different religion.
I respect religious people but don't respect religious people who hate other people because they are of a different religion.
I personally get high listening to old 70s prog rock records through my Dynaudio monitors.
Can't get much more religious than that unless you are a Richmond supporter.
Do the holy walk to London Tavern,then The Royal then to the grog squad.
I hope one day that people of all religions love each other instead of acting like stubborn mules over long time feuds between each other.
That's why AFL is a great game,we all get on post game.
That's why I love being Australian.
We pretty much all tolerate each other,you get your extremists but on the whole we all treat each other like brothers regardless of race or religion.
If you want a laugh just type in Irish rebels or orange party in you tube then sit and read the comments.
Silly little human beings.
Mother Nature knows all.
My parents didn't force religion down my throat or told me to hate other people if they are a different religion.
I respect religious people but don't respect religious people who hate other people because they are of a different religion.
I personally get high listening to old 70s prog rock records through my Dynaudio monitors.
Can't get much more religious than that unless you are a Richmond supporter.
Do the holy walk to London Tavern,then The Royal then to the grog squad.
I hope one day that people of all religions love each other instead of acting like stubborn mules over long time feuds between each other.
That's why AFL is a great game,we all get on post game.
That's why I love being Australian.
We pretty much all tolerate each other,you get your extremists but on the whole we all treat each other like brothers regardless of race or religion.
If you want a laugh just type in Irish rebels or orange party in you tube then sit and read the comments.
Silly little human beings.
Mother Nature knows all.
B
Bill James
Guest
While atheism may hold the truth, it has always seemed a truth to difficult to hold.
Existence requires the crossing of an infinite threshold. Simply put, something either came from nothing or has been there forever. Of course a third construct involves the existence of being capable of crossing both infinite thresholds in being there forever and creating something out of nothing.
Each of these scenarios seem equally incredulous but to hold that the only the third construct is impossible I must convince myself that in all time and space such a being is not in existence. Of course if I investigate all time and space I am an infinite being and have just blown my own mission.
So to prove there is no "god" I probably have to be "god" which doesn't help my case.
Which leaves us with the truth handed down by Tandberg in the Melbourne Age in the 1980's who when dealing with Bob Hawkes agnosticism famously concluded that Bob was not sure whether he was God or not.
Existence requires the crossing of an infinite threshold. Simply put, something either came from nothing or has been there forever. Of course a third construct involves the existence of being capable of crossing both infinite thresholds in being there forever and creating something out of nothing.
Each of these scenarios seem equally incredulous but to hold that the only the third construct is impossible I must convince myself that in all time and space such a being is not in existence. Of course if I investigate all time and space I am an infinite being and have just blown my own mission.
So to prove there is no "god" I probably have to be "god" which doesn't help my case.
Which leaves us with the truth handed down by Tandberg in the Melbourne Age in the 1980's who when dealing with Bob Hawkes agnosticism famously concluded that Bob was not sure whether he was God or not.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/ali-a-rizvi/an-atheist-muslims-perspective-on-the-root-causes-of-islamist-jihadism-and-the-politics-of-islamophobia_b_3159286.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
An excellent read linked to on Twitter by Tim Minchin. Who knew their were Atheist Muslims? Definitely worth a read. Amazing to see history repeat the way it is and and attempt to prise apart islamophobia and islamism.
An excellent read linked to on Twitter by Tim Minchin. Who knew their were Atheist Muslims? Definitely worth a read. Amazing to see history repeat the way it is and and attempt to prise apart islamophobia and islamism.
yup some very interesting stuff in there. I usually try to prise religion and human barbarism apart. I think religion only adds unnecessary complication. Humans act against other humans with murderous intent and consequences. Why allow religion into this space?
For me religions are created by people with all the characteristics of the people who laid them down.
They are used as an excuse by bastards to be bastards. Unfortunately due to the fact both are written by people in violent times, there's enough stuff in the bible and Koran fo provide plenty of justifications. The Koran is worse because there are times when it actually instructs Muslims to be violent to non-Muslims, while most of the Bibles violence is narrative. Both treat women and criminals harshly tho. Before people refer to the non-violent New Testament, Jesus says that the Old Testament laws are not changed by his teachings.
The other side of the coin however is the genuine spirituality that people can find in religions. Like the violence, I believe this is part of the human condition. Religions don't have exclusive rights to it, but can act as a useful path to it.
Sometimes religion will act as more than a conduit and become multipliers, where people who would not ordinarily be violent or spiritual will find themselves encouraged in those directions by religions.
But religions are only one of the many cultural factor that formulate human behaviour. They happen to be very influential because they have supernatural rather than earthly endorsement.
If there is some infinitely powerful and omnipresent entity, it won't bear any resemblance to the narrow descriptions laid down by earthly religions.
They are used as an excuse by bastards to be bastards. Unfortunately due to the fact both are written by people in violent times, there's enough stuff in the bible and Koran fo provide plenty of justifications. The Koran is worse because there are times when it actually instructs Muslims to be violent to non-Muslims, while most of the Bibles violence is narrative. Both treat women and criminals harshly tho. Before people refer to the non-violent New Testament, Jesus says that the Old Testament laws are not changed by his teachings.
The other side of the coin however is the genuine spirituality that people can find in religions. Like the violence, I believe this is part of the human condition. Religions don't have exclusive rights to it, but can act as a useful path to it.
Sometimes religion will act as more than a conduit and become multipliers, where people who would not ordinarily be violent or spiritual will find themselves encouraged in those directions by religions.
But religions are only one of the many cultural factor that formulate human behaviour. They happen to be very influential because they have supernatural rather than earthly endorsement.
If there is some infinitely powerful and omnipresent entity, it won't bear any resemblance to the narrow descriptions laid down by earthly religions.
