Quote from YourselfUh, no. For some it's specifically about removing religious fundamentalism from positions of power. Fundamentalism that demonstrably does spread hate. And that shouldn't be something that just atheists want to get rid of, that should be something that everyone should want to get rid of. Some atheists that identify as anti-theist do take this further and want to remove pretty much all religious types of thinking. I can't speak to their motivations, however.
I was speaking with reference to the atheism that I mentioned in the above description. I didn't mean to imply all atheists, as that would have included people who don't fall into that description (such as myself).
Quote from YourselfI would say you're demonstrably wrong in your analysis of both parties. I can't argue from the Christian angle because I don't understand their motivations, but I do know that their approaches to making the world "better" vary greatly, with most being benign and some (particularly fundamentalist approaches) being harmful to others.
It was an oversimplification, but it wasn't wholly false, either. I was just trying to illustrate their similarities.
Quote from YourselfThe vast majority of scientific history is male too. So what?
Yes, and there's a very interesting feminism branch of the philosophy of science that explores this masculine aspect of the sciences (such as in Newton's constant usage of the language of rape in describing how we should interact with nature). You may say "so what?", and in the process, miss something very important to understanding the nature of our sciences.
Quote from YourselfThe God that Christians historically accept is so mutable and nebulous that to say that they have ever accepted any one kind of God borders on the ridiculous. Tell me, what is the God that Christians historically accept? What are its properties? How do the properties of the God (or gods) that Dawkins rejects differ from the "historical" Christian God?
Yes, there is no one correct definition, this is true. It is also true, though, that the Christian concepts of God all have a lot of similarities. For instance, God is not literally a big man in the sky. Many of the criticisms of the Christian God are as old as the religion itself, and though none of the answers may be fully satisfactory, the remaining beliefs are still not as simplistic as is often assumed by critics. The reason that people like Dawkins don't convince Christians that they are wrong is because the God that Dawkins is talking about doesn't resemble their God.
Quote from YourselfThe difference being that we can actually concretely point out what it is that scientists actually say about evolution. And, when this usually comes up, it is often pointed out exactly what it is that makes an argument a straw man. I rarely, if ever, see you actually do this. I don't read all of your posts, so maybe I've missed it, but we really shouldn't have to ask you to explain yourself at every corner. If you make an assertion, back it up with some examples, save myself and others the trouble of asking.
The problem is, is that I could offer my thoughts and opinions in brief or I could just move on and not offer anything at all as most people might consider knowing that the topic is simply too vast to condense into a post. I could save myself a lot of effort by just pointing people to the literature that's already been written on the subjects that I may refer to, but in my experience nobody would follow through with it (which is understandable, given that these topics take a full book to even begin to discuss).
Robert Green "Bob" Ingersoll (August 11, 1833 – July 21, 1899).Quote from Kargoneth
One could make the case that atheism (not believing in deities) is as old as theism. It was only since the enlightenment that freethought and skepticism have really bloomed in the west. Until Charles Darwin, for example, there was not a good, scientifically supported explanation for the diversity of life, which was one reason for people to hold onto deities (though they still tended to be very minimalist and impersonal in the more educated population, like Deists)
Halfway through Ingersoll's life was when the term "agnostic" was coined. The freethinker movement began in the early to mid 18th century and was full of educated critics of religion. The term "atheist" had been used for quite some time already, but people typically didn't identify with it until the 19th century. Most of atheism and agnosticism today finds its roots in 19th century thought and hasn't really advanced much since that point.
Agnosticism and freethought were very strong phenomena in the late 1800s.Quote from Kargoneth
They were budding in the 18th century, but wouldn't come into their own until the 19th century.
Due to a sort of avalanche effect resulting in an explosion of scientific disciplines coupled with an increasing population (and thus, number of scientists), more scientific discoveries have taken place in the last century than in the previous centuries. It should not be difficult to find modern (within the last 60 or so years) scientists that are atheists.Quote from Kargoneth
It's not difficult at all!
How do you figure that? The cultures of Babylonians, Greeks, Egyptians, Arabs were all very advanced. If you are referring to the form of the current scientific method then yes, Christians have the majority of science In terms of years, but that's only because modern science was formalized during the later reign of Christianity. I would be skeptical that Christians have the vast majority of scientific history in terms of hours-per-scientist, however, due to my previous point. I would be unsurprised if the vast majority of scientific history in terms of hours-per-scientist is non-Christian.Quote from Kargoneth
It would be anachronistic to call what the Babylonians, Greeks, Egyptians, and Arabs has "science". What each had was a fundamentally different way of examining the world, and even within each of these cultures, there were several methods. Science, as we understand the term today, is a uniquely Christian philosophy.
The problem is that there are millions of different concepts of what a god is (one could argue that there was nearly one concept of god for every monotheist, and many for every polytheist), so it is not difficult for someone to say "that's not the god I believe in, therefore it's just a strawman".Quote from Kargoneth
Correct, but the kind of God that is attacked is often the kind of God that next to no one (outside of American Christian fundamentalism) actually believes is, especially those outside of Christianity altogether.
1
Still pretty nice.
Greetz Just
1
1
If i were him,i'd wait until 1.7.756785 is released :wink.gif:
And if you continue on complaining,he may never updates again.
1
I just started a desertworld (1.5.01) and wanted to life there.
But without CactusCraft (which is pretty nais) i wouldnt be able to survive there without running 30 minutes to the next tree.
So i thought it should be possible to survive there.
1.What should be added...
Everything from CactusCraft !
Maybe he can add this things to it (he is Tehkrush , right ?).
(until now ,
Everything made out of Cacti look a little bit greenier.
This is my idea about it.
Please give me some feedback and some ideas.
I am not able to make it.
I tried making a mod but failed laing the path :biggrin.gif: .
So somebody else need to do this.
MfG JustSmall