1. Comment #32652 by BAEOZ on April 17, 2007 at 11:22 pm

I look at the excertps from the site and they were brief to say the least. It didn't really seem to say much at all, except that he's a creationist and he likes it when go gets michevious (I would've thought a perfect being to be incapable of that)....
I did like the title of the post here "SAM'S FLEA". I think though we are preaching to the choir and so is that guy to his respective choir. They'll lap up his dogma and bull and laugh at how we all are going to suffer eternal damnation for not seeing their truth. I chat on another site with religious types (www.religiousfreaks.com) and I can't even get them to recognize their own quite obvious fallacies and much more. Not sure how to deal with people who filter out all that doesn't agree with their world view. Any suggestions?

Other Comments by BAEOZ

2. Comment #32654 by GodlessHeathen on April 17, 2007 at 11:26 pm

"Wilson dismantles his arguments and demonstrates that honesty lies on the side of the Christians, not the atheists."

Right. I'm not holding my breath that Wilson will have anything in this book other than the tired old non-arguments. The excerpts on the site look and smell like the typical apologist vapid empty spaces.

Anyone going to be getting a copy? I admit curiosity but I'm hesitant to spend money on it for fear it is just the usual tripe.

Other Comments by GodlessHeathen

3. Comment #32655 by John Phillips on April 17, 2007 at 11:27 pm

Which if the short excerpts on his site are any guide are no different to the garbage we have already heard from a myriad other creationists. Simply another creationist hoping to sell books on the back of Sam's book, much like the attempt to sell on the back of TGD with titles like The Dawkins Delusion. It appears that they only display any actual creativity of their own when it comes to devising ways to twist the truth to promote their viewpoint.

Other Comments by John Phillips

4. Comment #32658 by cacahahacaca on April 17, 2007 at 11:51 pm

Anyone going to be getting a copy? I admit curiosity but I'm hesitant to spend money on it for fear it is just the usual tripe.

I don't think anyone should. That will only fund these nutjobs and boost their sales numbers so they can claim to be right.

Other Comments by cacahahacaca

5. Comment #32659 by GodlessHeathen on April 17, 2007 at 11:57 pm

I don't think anyone should. That will only fund these nutjobs and boost their sales numbers so they can claim to be right.

I think along those lines, too. However, I don't really want to isolate myself from their point of view, nutters thought it is. I take seriously the idea of "know thy enemy' ;)
I've often thought a grand solution would be a community purchase, we buy one and only one copy of a nutter's tome and one person reads it, then sends it to the next person... etc.

Other Comments by GodlessHeathen

6. Comment #32660 by James Carroll on April 17, 2007 at 11:58 pm

My God, this guy is an idiot. Don't waste your money.

"Douglas Wilson has taken the operating assumptions of Sam Harris seriously and has shown what life would be like if the world were consistent with atheistic assumptions."

Let's see where I go by being consistent with atheistic "assumptions".

Ok, the first atheistic "assumption" (or lack thereof): Withhold belief in any gods.

So, from that we can easily see that atheists are people who withhold belief in any gods.

Well, that's it for today kids, hope you enjoyed my being consistent, right down to the end.


This whole thing is ridiculous.

Other Comments by James Carroll

7. Comment #32662 by grandpop on April 18, 2007 at 12:03 am

BAEOZ, I understand your frustration when chating on 'believer's sites'. I do that occasionaly, but more often have heated discussions with believers in my family/circle of friends.

I would urge you not to give up, but to think that, maybe, you will have sown a seed in a few people's mind. One needs patience to see a seed develop and grow. Usually, these guys have had years of brain-washing. It is even harder when you can't see the results! All I can add is that intellectual challenge did the trick with me some 40 years ago, having been brought up as a 'fully fledged catholic'!

Pragmatically, I don't think you will ever get a response on the lines of "...of course, you are right, how silly of me...."

You can also see it as a way of honing your skills and keeping your mind sharp (which is critical for me in my advancing years!)

Keep up the good work.

Grandpop (and happy atheist)

Other Comments by grandpop

8. Comment #32665 by Dog Boots on April 18, 2007 at 12:52 am

About the whole buying or not buying/boosting sales thing - how about waiting to see if the book has any success without us first. Then make a decision.

As for the excerpts: Geezz....

Excerpt

#1: "High entertainment value"!?!? This guy should seriously think about writing when he's not high as a kite. I'm sure Michael J Fox will find great comfort in the "entertainment value" while waiting an unnecessary extra 4 years for a cure.

#2: Good that makes two of you. Anyone with real credentials on the subject?

#3: Again, Douglas: wait till you're sober. When your god "misbehaves" it's the same as the "mysterious ways" argument, which it is important that everyone recognize is the worst out of all possible arguments. You admit that it doesn't really fit the evidence, but go ahead believing in it anyway. You just call it "god misbehaving". Weak.

#4: This is like when people try to defuse a situation on a message board by overusing smileys. A friendly moron is still a moron.

Other Comments by Dog Boots

9. Comment #32666 by infidel_michael on April 18, 2007 at 12:53 am

Douglas Wilson ... has shown what life would be like if the world were consistent with atheistic assumptions.

Let me guess:
Everybody would be a communist or nazi and eugenicist, everybody would steal, rape and kill other people because nobody would be afraid of God. Everybody in hospitals would die, because nobody would pray for them. Every sport game would end draw, because no sportsman would pray for his victory. Artists would stop creating art, because without God, there is no beauty. And nobody would love other people, because without "Love everybody!!!"-command there cannot be love.
Am I right?

(oh, I forgot - everybody would commit a suicide, because without afterlife, this life is meaningless)

Other Comments by infidel_michael

10. Comment #32667 by Corylus on April 18, 2007 at 1:00 am

Anyone going to be getting a copy? I admit curiosity but I'm hesitant to spend money on it for fear it is just the usual tripe.

I really understand where you are coming from here - you want to be intellectually fair and read before you criticise, but you do not want to put money in these people's pockets...

N.B. British readers might like to know that WHSmith has a big '3 books for the price of 2' promotion on at the moment and 'The Dawkins Delusion' is one of those books featured ;-)

It may be that this cuts down on all author's profits or maybe the retailer covers the costs?? I don't know, but I must admit getting this book for 'free' the other day gave me an inordinate amount of pleasure.

Other Comments by Corylus

11. Comment #32673 by BAEOZ on April 18, 2007 at 1:37 am

Hey Grandpop, thanks for the comments. My frustration isn't with them not considering that they change their beliefs. I can't even get them to accept that I don't believe in evolution, that it's just an explanation for an observable phenomenon. I think because to admit I don't believe in my ideas, they can't posit the argument as one god against their god.... anyway, it doesn't matter.
I do enjoy sharpening my quite weak logical skills. In the last month or 2 I've read RD's God Delusion, Daniel Dennet's End of Faith and a few similar books which have helped me clarify arguments in my head. I too was raised by a pretty devout catholic family, but I never believed, just couldn't say so without being punished. But I grew up and moved :)

Other Comments by BAEOZ

12. Comment #32674 by Joe_OD on April 18, 2007 at 1:55 am

I would suggest just reading it in the book store if you don't want to buy it. If it's similar in length to Letter to a Christian Nation, then it will only take an hour or two to finish.

I certainly won't buy it.

Other Comments by Joe_OD

13. Comment #32675 by Paul Nettleship on April 18, 2007 at 1:55 am

From the excerpts posted on his site, I don't think Sam Harris should lose any sleep.

"There are, as you point out, over 350,000 species of beetles...I think it is the coolest thing in the world that our God created that many different kinds of beetles."

And if you don't want to line this guy's pockets (I don't) see if a local library has it.

Other Comments by Paul Nettleship

14. Comment #32681 by Fanusi Khiyal on April 18, 2007 at 2:28 am

Taking a look at the exerpts from that book.

Seriously. Tell me this man is not actually a plant.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

15. Comment #32684 by phil rimmer on April 18, 2007 at 2:45 am

Comment #32652 by BAEOZ

"Not sure how to deal with people who filter out all that doesn't agree with their world view. Any suggestions?"

I've had really intelligent discussion at-

www.commonwealmagazine.org

You can get a long way with some of them, e.g. acting from personal belief rather than dogma is the more moral (and more pursuasive!) stance. It is the most pleasant and civilised religious site I've come across. Don't expect a conversion though!

Other Comments by phil rimmer

16. Comment #32685 by SteveN on April 18, 2007 at 2:45 am

Quick correction to post #32673 by BAEOZ: 'End of Faith' is Sam Harris's book. Maybe you're thinking of Dennet's 'Darwin's Dangerous Idea'?

Other Comments by SteveN

17. Comment #32689 by Rtambree on April 18, 2007 at 3:14 am

I'd be surprised if Wilson has actually responded to anything Harris has written. Judging by all the dozens of other reviews of Dawkins/Harris etc posted on this site, it is unlikely.

It'll be all the usual - you can't disprove God, who created the Universe?, the God you mock isn't the one I worship, Stalin was an atheist, blah blah blah.

Other Comments by Rtambree

18. Comment #32690 by BAEOZ on April 18, 2007 at 3:21 am

Hey SteveN, you're right, I meant Breakin the spell. Thanks

Other Comments by BAEOZ

19. Comment #32697 by pissinintothewind on April 18, 2007 at 3:38 am

BAEOZ, Your in for a long haul and tenacity is a virtue.

Other Comments by pissinintothewind

20. Comment #32701 by Yorker on April 18, 2007 at 3:51 am

2. Comment #32654 by GodlessHeathen

"Anyone going to be getting a copy? I admit curiosity but I'm hesitant to spend money on it for fear it is just the usual tripe."

What else can it be? A new powerful argument backed by irrefutable evidence? I don't think so, save your money my friend.

Other Comments by Yorker

21. Comment #32706 by mrnorman on April 18, 2007 at 4:14 am

Is this guy being serious or really satirical? I'm not sure anyone in their right mind would take this guy remotely seriously. I guess we will see though.

D

Other Comments by mrnorman

22. Comment #32708 by Deoradh on April 18, 2007 at 4:18 am

Alister McGrath must be pissed that he was beaten to it

Other Comments by Deoradh

23. Comment #32718 by Pi Guy on April 18, 2007 at 5:06 am

I often go to Barnes & Noble, grab a coffee, and "preview" a book. I'll give this one a perusal or two and report my findings here. I've read LtaCN twice since Dec so, if it has any meat (which I doubt) or attempts even a poor point-counterpoint presentation, I'll share that here. If it doesn't actually address any Sam Harris's points - which I find rather likely - I will let you know that as well.

While I don't really wish to financially support their cause, I don't object too greatly buying the book in order to read and critique it. Much as it is important to know the Bible - and I never cease to be amazed that so many of us know the Bible more thoroughly than the so many of the faithful - these books are typically the same old claptrap, often without even the most modest attempt to repackage it. But, as it still fails to trip the BS-ometer of so, so many, it serves as a reminder of what we're really up against here. And, as was noted above, book sales are some indication of its impact, if not its content.

I'll let you know what I find soon.

Other Comments by Pi Guy

24. Comment #32720 by Deimos on April 18, 2007 at 5:11 am

'Atheistic assumption' is a misnomer.
'God assumption' is correct expression.
Theists always announce we can't prove God's existence. This is a deception tactic. The theist invents the condition that God is outside this Universe and so can't be proved. However they are making the God assumption, i.e. that God exists. Without ability to infer God's existence (this is a logical conclusion based on the assertion that god can't be proved to exist) they can't assume God exists. So where does the idea of God come from? From the Ego of the human.

The theist who is writing a response to Sam wants to describe what the world is like without God ('atheistic assumption').
But we are living in a Universe that is without God.

Other Comments by Deimos

25. Comment #32733 by Aaron on April 18, 2007 at 6:05 am

I tried listening to a radio interview from a link on the book's webpage but I stopped listening after about 10 minutes of nonsense. Is this guy the biggest gun the Christians can muster?

Other Comments by Aaron

26. Comment #32734 by Phaderus on April 18, 2007 at 6:13 am

I think Pi Guy has the right idea. I travel a lot and usually just find the nearest book store and sit down with a stack of books that catch my eye. Just think of it as a library with a coffee shop.

I typically only buy the books like TGD and End of Faith that I will want to re-read or loan to others. As has been noted, it usually only takes a few minutes with the religious books to determine if they are worth a closer look.

I actually read Thomas Harris' last book "Hannibal Rising" over two evenings last month. But somehow I doubt I'll be able to do that with the new Harry Potter this summer.

Other Comments by Phaderus

27. Comment #32735 by Ole on April 18, 2007 at 6:14 am

A problem I often find with people who tell me they are christians, are that they lack knowledge about their own "holy book". They never took the time to read the book.

When a christian tell me he dislike the stoning business in islam, I tell him: "What about your own holy book?" But he never read a verse like this (from Deuteronomy):

You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. You shall stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt out of the land or slavery.

I have a feeling this is the case with Douglas Wilson in regards to evolution. Have he ever read any serious books about evolution?

If not, why bother with his arguments about 350,000 species of beetles etc.

Ole

Other Comments by Ole

28. Comment #32737 by Yorker on April 18, 2007 at 6:29 am

11. Comment #32672 by Shaker2007

I like your angry baby avatar, I didn't see a post by you on the "circumcision" thread, it would have been appropriate!

I would like to suggest a superimposed caption for your avatar that reads:

"Leave my dick alone you religious pricks!"

That would have been a killer!

Other Comments by Yorker

29. Comment #32741 by drcowboybc on April 18, 2007 at 6:42 am

Fanusi Khiyal asked:
"Seriously. Tell me this man is not actually a plant."

Nope, he's real, and serious (in his own mind). He's popular among a certain strain of conservative Presbyterians and Reformed church people. He lives in Moscow, Idaho, and runs a church and a college: http://www.nsa.edu/

But Wilson was not the first to try and capitalize on Harris's success with a "rebuttal" whose cover looks like the original: http://thinkagain.us/

However, I think both of these efforts must have the same person running their marketing campaign. My blog has been hit by advertisements for both books. Looking back through my logs, both posters had googled "Letter to a Christian Nation blog". When they found mine, they pasted the advertisement in multiple places, including posts that had nothing to do with "Letter."

Other Comments by drcowboybc

30. Comment #32742 by Smith on April 18, 2007 at 6:43 am

Does anyone have any idea about what's happening with Sam's blogolog with Andrew Sullivan? Is it ended somehow already? Anyone gets an update?

Other Comments by Smith

31. Comment #32748 by Fishpeddler on April 18, 2007 at 6:58 am

Comment #32735 by Ole
"If not, why bother with his arguments about 350,000 species of beetles etc."

I expect he thought he was making a clever twist on JBS Haldane's famous remark that God "must have an inordinate fondness for beetles."

Guessing what the titles of the theist response books will be is a source of amusement for me. Now that they're coming out, what should the response to the response be? I'm thinking "Letter to a Christian Abomination".

Other Comments by Fishpeddler

32. Comment #32751 by poundemonium on April 18, 2007 at 7:03 am

For a view of Douglas Wilson's intellectually-impoverished response to Harris, listen to his radio interview with Gary DeMar. I only wish I'd listened to it live so that I could phone in and demolish the army of straw men raised by this predictable scat. Fundamentalists seem utterly incapable of even realizing how their arguments fail the dorm-room test of logical consistency. Nothing but innuendo, misrepresentation, non sequiturs, and outright lies.

Other Comments by poundemonium

33. Comment #32752 by poundemonium on April 18, 2007 at 7:04 am

I neglected to post the link:

http://www.americanvision.org/radio/tgds/default.asp

Find the interview on the right-hand side window (April 11).

Other Comments by poundemonium

34. Comment #32760 by Smith on April 18, 2007 at 7:28 am

Just curious (but don't wanna waste time on the interview): Did Gary DeMar "demolish the army of straw men raised by this predictable scat" then?

Other Comments by Smith

35. Comment #32768 by Jessie on April 18, 2007 at 8:05 am

Just curious (but don't wanna waste time on the interview): Did Gary DeMar "demolish the army of straw men raised by this predictable scat" then?

Nope. This is pretty bad, actually, even for Christian talk radio. They first note that atheists have no reason to be moral because we're all gonna be dead in 200 years. Why don't they realize that atheists can have empathy? Pain is a very real thing, so it's not illogical to attempt to minimize it in oneself and others. I wonder if these guys realize that there's a rather large body of literature devoted to ethics that does not mention God?

They also seem to think that because atheists figure that most critters are the ultimate result of evolution via natural selection, we're all a bunch of social darwinists. Ugh. I don't know of a single evolutionary biologist or atheist who's a social darwinist. Evolution is what happens in nature; it's not a moral philosophy or system of government. Using natural selection as a basis of law or government is like using gravity as one. It makes no sense.

Now, they're arguing that Sam Harris is all wrong because human thoughts are just complex chemical reactions. Well, what I'd like to know, if thoughts don't arise from the brain and from the action of neurons & neurotransmitters (which they seem to think a Christian worldview suggests), and if there's some sort of incorporeal mind separate from the brain, why do drugs, brain injuries, and seizures produce visible and notable affects on someone's thoughts and/or behavior? They don't go on and explain why thoughts & visual/auditory observations become invalid if they're the result of material processes.

Okay, now they're going on to morality. Oh, this is just painful to listen to. Now we atheists are evil & bad people for not believing in heaven. They're arguing that "morality" is an exclusively Christian domain. Only theists have morality, because morality comes from God - God tells us not to murder, so only Christians have a good reason not to do this. Ugh!

Now, how is that even moral? I'd say that the truly moral person is the one who is kind because he wants to be and because he's empathetic, not because he's afraid of punishment from God.

Now he says that he can't be sure that Nazis are wrong without the Bible. We also, apparently, cannot know that rape is wrong without checking with the Bible. Huh. I'd say it's wrong because it can deeply harm and traumatize another person, and if someone cannot understand that arguement, then they're the one with the problem, not I. God or not, humans & many animals are capable of physical and mental pain, and it's a perfectly logical thing to attempt to minimize those.

So, Harris has nothing to worry about! These are the same old arguements. Frankly, these guys are making themselves sound like unempathetic thugs with their insistence that one needs the Bible to be a good moral person. Personally, I have no desire to harm other people and I do not need the threat of Hell, or commands from a cruel God, to tell me not to. I've come up against similar arguements in real life, and frankly, I find it insulting when Christians suggest that I'm so mentally and morally weak that I need some ancient holy book to tell me that murder is wrong.

Other Comments by Jessie

36. Comment #32772 by AtheistAcolyte on April 18, 2007 at 8:20 am

I don't think anyone should. That will only fund these nutjobs and boost their sales numbers so they can claim to be right.

See if your local library has a copy. Then make copies and distribute online. :-)

Other Comments by AtheistAcolyte

37. Comment #32774 by poundemonium on April 18, 2007 at 8:29 am

Smith, Jessie provides a spot-on synopsis of the interview.

A humorous side note to Wilson's "argument." He prides himself on how the physical design of his book mirrors Harris' Letter to a Christian Nation, as if mimicking tit-for-tat (unintelligent design?) somehow puts his ramblings on a par with Harris' unassailable logic.

Other Comments by poundemonium

38. Comment #32777 by The_Pun_King on April 18, 2007 at 8:43 am

You have to give the guy credit though. He actually read Harris' book, while all you guys just gawk at his. He's actually responding to words written in LtaCN, while y'all are just pretending to interact with him. You aren't helping the atheist ethos. He's shown more goodwill at this point than any atheist could rationally or consistently muster.

Other Comments by The_Pun_King

39. Comment #32780 by jrizziii on April 18, 2007 at 8:46 am

We also, apparently, cannot know that rape is wrong without checking with the Bible. Huh. I'd say it's wrong because it can deeply harm and traumatize another person, and if someone cannot understand that arguement, then they're the one with the problem, not I.

Maybe religion needs to be around to restrain immoral people like Wilson. I actually get a little scared when I think what would happen in America without religion. Many of these people are violent nutjobs with their god looking down on them, what kind of harm would they do if that god disappeared?

Other Comments by jrizziii

40. Comment #32783 by Hip_Priest on April 18, 2007 at 8:51 am

I've just listened to the show. Jessie's summary is pretty accurate. What I found more surprising were the ads. Seriously scary stuff. What more born again christians need, apparantly, is a 'biblical world view'

Other Comments by Hip_Priest

41. Comment #32789 by ghostbuster on April 18, 2007 at 8:57 am

If anyone really wants to irritate themselves with this kind of crap go to NewsWithViews.com. It will give you an idea of the same kind of thoughts as this article gives; it also will give you yet another example of what the world would look like if Christians had it their way---not that Christians can actually get along with one another without blasphemying other sects right, left and centre. The war between those who believe and those who don't would look like child's play compared to believers fighting each other over what their ghost "really" said. In fact, history is replete with examples.

Other Comments by ghostbuster

42. Comment #32791 by Smith on April 18, 2007 at 8:57 am

Are you being sarcastic, King? Because:
1. "He actually read Harris' book" sounds like "God exists!" to me. Of course, I can't prove he didn't.
2. "He's actually responding to words written in LtaCN": Yeah, he's not responding to the "arguments presented" in LtaCN.
3. "You aren't helping the atheist ethos. He's shown more goodwill at this point than any atheist could rationally or consistently muster.": Now I'm totally lost.

Other Comments by Smith

43. Comment #32793 by Mr. Mark on April 18, 2007 at 9:02 am

Prediction time: any atheist who reads Wilson's book will have already read Sam's book, while 99.999% of Xians who read Wilson's book will not have read Sam's book in advance and will make no effort to read Sam's book after reading Wilson's book.

Other Comments by Mr. Mark

44. Comment #32795 by poundemonium on April 18, 2007 at 9:04 am

jrizziii: Good point.

Your observation reminds me of a radio interview Dr. Dawkins gave while in America. A Christian caller to the show, when asked by the host whether without religious prohibition of murder he would kill his neighbour, replied without hesitation: "Yes!"

Other Comments by poundemonium

45. Comment #32796 by The_Pun_King on April 18, 2007 at 9:04 am

I'm just curious how you can make statements like "Yeah, he's not responding to the "arguments presented" in LtaCN." without having read the book. This just makes you sound like a fundamentalist of another stripe. You may not be religious, but you're sounding equally irrational.

Other Comments by The_Pun_King

46. Comment #32797 by poundemonium on April 18, 2007 at 9:08 am

The_Pun_King: I, for one, am responding to the fallacies inherent in the points Wilson raised against Harris in his radio interview (I posted a link to it above).

There is nothing "irrational" about that. What is irrational is Wilson's assumption that morality can't exist without a Sky Daddy wielding his mighty stick at hapless humanity.

Other Comments by poundemonium

47. Comment #32799 by The_Pun_King on April 18, 2007 at 9:20 am

"What is irrational is Wilson's assumption that morality can't exist without a Sky Daddy wielding his mighty stick at hapless humanity."

Well, how exactly can you have objective morality without some objective standard?

Other Comments by The_Pun_King

48. Comment #32800 by Fishpeddler on April 18, 2007 at 9:20 am

Comment #32777 by The_Pun_King

"He's shown more goodwill at this point than any atheist could rationally or consistently muster."

Absurd statement, for many reasons.

1) Reading Harris' book isn't necessarily a demonstration of "goodwill". Goodwill would suggest he was open to persuasion by the arguments in the book. More likely, he read the book merely as an essential first step in attempting to refute it.

2) "...than any atheist could..." That claim is doomed to failure right out of the blocks. Helpful hint: avoid 'never' and 'not any' type arguments. You'll seldom be right.

3) Has this book even been out a week? The fact that we don't all have it memorized yet isn't an act of ill will.

4) If Harris' book hadn't been a national bestseller and cultural phenomenon, there is no reason to believe that Wilson would have gone to the trouble to read it and respond. If Wilson's book achieves equivalent significance within the god-debate genre, only then should we feel obligated to devote precious time to it. Anyway, if he's right, we'll have plenty of time to read it in heaven... er, I mean hell.

Other Comments by Fishpeddler

49. Comment #32802 by Fishpeddler on April 18, 2007 at 9:30 am

"Well, how exactly can you have objective morality without some objective standard?"

When during this thread did we switch from speaking about morality to speaking more narrowly about objective morality? The terms are not synonymous. I think we're getting into that age-old problem of people arguing about 'morality' because they have differing understandings of what the word means.

Other Comments by Fishpeddler

50. Comment #32804 by The_Pun_King on April 18, 2007 at 9:46 am

Well, I'm fine with talking about subjective morality, but what would be the point of that? Then Hitler, George Bush, Christians, etc. could be perfectly 'moral' folks in their own eyes, do terrible things, and nobody would have any solid foundation from which to criticize them.

Other Comments by The_Pun_King