1. Investigating Atheism

Comment #166937 by Camsaint on April 23, 2008 at 1:54 pm

carbonman - I agree absolutely. To continue the analogy, it's as if smallpox then tried to convince the world that instead of being threatened by Jenner, it actually had a full and useful role to play in framing the debate about poxes in the modern world.

Still, if they go belly up, the history faculty could use the extra space they've got in that snazzy building on the Sedgwick site. It's much nicer than the Seeley.

2. Investigating Atheism

Comment #166878 by Camsaint on April 23, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Marvellous. A project run by the faculty of Divinity. They're probably just trying to use the current popularity of atheist literature to raise their profile a bit. Essentially a bunch of well dressed fleas with html skills.

At the moment the faculty of Divinity is about as significant a part of Cambridge intellectual life as the Department of Land Economy. Let's keep it that way!

3. Two More Fleas

Comment #142435 by Camsaint on March 12, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Long time lurker, first time poster etc. I really like the Q&A format. Thought I'd try to do something similar.

Has anyone provided a proof of God's inexistence?

Sorry, I assumed only a fool would ask us to. Unicorns, teapots near Mars, burden of proof, ad bloody infinitum.

Has quantum cosmology explained the emergence of the universe or why it is here?

Nope, not conclusively. And your point is? Has anything else? For a given value of 'explained', of course.

Have the sciences explained why our universe seems to be fine-tuned to allow for the existence of life?

I think the key phrase is 'seems to be'. And 'explained', again. I must admit I am reminded of Douglas Adams' puddle.

Are physicists and biologists willing to believe in anything so long as it is not religious thought?

Easy enough to test. Any physicists or biologists out there prepared, nay 'willing', to believe that I've just sawn my own arse off and flown to Swindon on a camel called Steve? Is that 'anything' enough for you? It's not religious. I haven't, by the way. But you can believe it if you like.

Has rationalism in moral thought provided us with an understanding of what is good, what is right, and what is moral?

Yes, if you mean what I think you mean. You have expressed it very badly. Ask Epicurus.

Has secularism in the terrible twentieth century been a force for good?

Yes. Again, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Well, I know what you think you're getting at. But you haven't done it very well, probably because you've used the word 'secularism'.

Is there a narrow and oppressive orthodoxy of thought and opinion within the sciences?

No. Can anyone be a good boy or girl and point out another bunch that has a narrow and oppressive orthodoxy of opinion?

Does anything in the sciences or in their philosophy justify the claim that religious belief is irrational?

Define your terms. Or don't bother. Either way the answer is 'yes'.

Bet the book's great.