1. Beyond Belief 07: Enlightenment 2.0

Comment #93663 by pauliej on December 3, 2007 at 9:22 pm

Yippee!!! All plans for this weekend are cancelled : I have videos to watch!

2. Good News: Both our Foundations are now Officially Recognized as Charities

Comment #70345 by pauliej on September 15, 2007 at 2:31 am

Hurray! Congratulations! And well done to those involved!

3. Review of Richard Dawkins' new book 'The Fascism Delusion'

Comment #69239 by pauliej on September 10, 2007 at 6:16 am

Berybob, it's not surprising that you found no direct rebuttals to TGD in 'Dawkin's God' - it was written a year before TGD ;-). McGrath's rebuttal to TGD is 'The Dawkins Delusion'. I doubt you'll find it anymore impressive than his previous effort, though.

If ever I can bring myself to finish The Dawkins Delusion, I want to write a rebuttal called 'The McGrath Confusion' :-)

4. Bonobos and chimps 'speak' with gestures

Comment #37319 by pauliej on May 4, 2007 at 4:45 am

For another look at bonobo communication skills, I thoroughly recommend this :

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/76

5. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #34731 by pauliej on April 25, 2007 at 2:45 am

Dawkins et al are "... in danger of damaging the public's trust in science"

Is this the same public which has kept The God Delusion on the NY Times bestseller list for 30 weeks?

And Dawkins thinks "that religious and spiritual values are to be discounted"

I don't think Dawkins discounts "spiritual" values at all, in the wider sense of the word "spiritual". What he discounts is their claim to be of divine or supernatural origin. And, of course, he also discounts the many bad religious values which are around.

6. Atheists split on how to not believe

Comment #34023 by pauliej on April 23, 2007 at 4:12 am

When bishops and priests stop trying to teach our children that belief without evidence is a virtue; when they stop complaining about the secularisation of society as though there's something wrong with all of us; when they stop pretending that they have some moral insight which the rest of us lack; when they stop trying to corrupt scientfic understanding with ill-informed dogma, stop trying to seek legal exemptions from anti-discrimination laws, stop seeking to run schools which discriminate in their selection on the basis of faith (or at least on the parents' pretence of faith) ... then perhaps, just perhaps, we should tone down our criticisms of them; criticisms which already involve no violence, no demonstrations, no intimidation ... just robust discussion. But even if we go quieter about the mainstream religious views, we'll still have the extremists to deal with!

Having said that, as a Humanist I do also think it is important to emphasise the positive nature of Humanism; to light up imaginations, make the awesomeness of the universe and of humanity, the power of rational thought, the nature of human ethics, readily accessible to as many people as possible. And I see nothing wrong with Humanist groups, fellowships or even chaplains, to provide social and emotional support in the community for those who need it, as well as intellectual stimulation and a focus for making our presence felt in society.

7. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30106 by pauliej on April 7, 2007 at 1:27 am

Corylus wrote:
The reason that there are less female than male atheists worldwide is because of discrimination in terms of providing education.

Actually, I think the evidence shows higher religiosity among females across the spectrum, even where educational opportunity and attainment is pretty much equal.

8. Did John Paul II perform a miracle? Am I Mother Teresa?

Comment #30097 by pauliej on April 7, 2007 at 12:53 am

... the woeful confusion of faith with superstition?

What confusion? Faith is sexed-up superstition.

9. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30096 by pauliej on April 7, 2007 at 12:48 am

It is strange that the Koran, which explicitly accepts the virgin birth of Jesus, fastens on the most historical bit of the New Testament as being untrue.

The most historical bit?? What?? The crucifixion?? There is not one shred of primary evidence that the crucifixion ever happened (or even that the NT Jesus actually existed).

This seems to me to present certain problems. A religious faith is not, primarily, a set of propositions, although it will contain such propositions and must use all human intellectual resources to understand and explain them. It is a belief about what governs the whole of life, indeed the whole existence of everything.

Isn't a claim about "what govens the whole of life...." a proposition? It doesn't cease to be one just because it is labelled "belief".

10. Dawkins says religion is 'like sucking a dummy'

Comment #28447 by pauliej on March 29, 2007 at 8:23 am

Fairly close to my own catch phrase which is that, "God is a placebo"

But a placebo should contain no active ingredient. Religion is often laced with poison.

11. Richard Dawkins: Author of the Year!

Comment #28270 by pauliej on March 28, 2007 at 3:18 pm

isn't it about time somebody in the know raised the possibility of a knighthood?

A peerage would be better, at least until the final stage of House of Lords reform is completed. That would not only be an honour, but it would give him a voice in our legislature.

12. Believers are away with the fairies

Comment #27866 by pauliej on March 27, 2007 at 4:45 am

I don't quite understand the rest of your comments, I'm afraid. 'Solitary rationalists' are very powerful people, especially if they understand the channels through which to amplify their voices, e.g. blogging, writing newspaper and magazine articles and, most noticeably, writing critical, best-selling books.

In past centuries, in order to effect change, solitary rationalists had to influence a relatively small constituency of people, who were educated, engaged in discourse and had power far beyond their numeric strength. Today, if one wants to influence public policy reasonably quickly, one has to influence politicians who are always looking out for their popular vote and keen not to court bad publicity by alienating large communities. Tony Blair isn't going to care whether or not he upsets a few academics and members of the "chattering classes". He is going to care if the vote-wielding atheist/Humanist community is large, organised and vocal at a popular level, in the way that religious communities are.

It may be that the general trend is slowly going against religion, but given the more dangerous and assertive nature of modern religious extremism, can we really afford to wait until the rationalist mindset filters its way into popular society solely by individual efforts?

13. Believers are away with the fairies

Comment #27855 by pauliej on March 27, 2007 at 4:05 am

I'm all for spreading memes individually, but I am not sure that is enough to counter the organised, mass-membership, well-financed, media-favoured legions of religion. In Britain, a recent MORI poll indicated that about 36% of the population hold Humanist views (and over 60% are "partially Humanist"), but few of them self-identify as Humanists, which leaves organisations such as the BHA with very small memberships and low public profiles. That makes them easy for government and the media to ignore.

I think the cause of secularism would be better served if its campaigning organisations could demonstrate that they are the chosen representatives of a significant part of the population. Even if one takes no active part in the group, simply being a member (and the membership fee) can make a difference. Just imagine if the BHA could lobby in the corridors of power supported by a registered membership which exceeds that of the Church of England. The Humanists are out there, but as individuals most are largely invisible to national decision-makers.

14. Happy 66th Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #27764 by pauliej on March 26, 2007 at 3:33 pm

Happy birthday, Prof. Dawkins. Thank you for your role in bringing the wonder and power of science alive to non-scientists such as myself, and for your powerful advocacy of reason in the battle against superstition and irrationality.

15. Conservapedia v Wikipedia

Comment #24597 by pauliej on March 7, 2007 at 2:11 pm

What a joke! Conservapedia reeks of narrow-minded bias, with a level of detail and intelligence which one might expect from a fairly average school child.

16. Senator calls for answer on creation of universe

Comment #23898 by pauliej on March 3, 2007 at 12:54 pm

If I was the Education Commissioner, I think my answer would go something like this :

It is certain beyond all reasonable doubt that both the universe and life have evolved into their present states from simpler states over billions of years. Whether those processes of evolution were initiated by a supreme being is a question which science is not equipped to answer. Therefore, any theory or hypothesis which postulates the existence of a supreme being is inherently non-scientific, and so has no place in a science curriculum.

17. Merkel wants EU to be vocal about Christian roots

Comment #23532 by pauliej on March 1, 2007 at 1:28 pm

"If we are honest, we often lack the strength to clearly state what our beliefs are and that makes us less credible to others with different beliefs and values."

Who the hell is the "us" Frau Merkel is referring to? Millions of Europeans do not feel any Christian spiritual connections and cannot, in conscience, subscribe to any document which invokes the Christian God. A constitution should be all-embracing, not enshrine the stance of just one sector of our society, whether it is political, cultural or religious.

18. Sextuplet parents take B.C. to court over baby seizures

Comment #20348 by pauliej on February 2, 2007 at 12:00 am

If the babies had died for lack of a blood transfusion, I hope the parents would have faced prosecution for causing death by neglect (or some such offence).

There was a conflict of rights here : religious vs human. People need to understand that human rights must always trump any other rights.

19. Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #19994 by pauliej on January 31, 2007 at 3:15 am

"Good article in Times2 today including an interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, but I can't find a weblink to it."

Here's the link http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,2736-2573976,00.html

20. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #18060 by pauliej on January 18, 2007 at 5:14 am

Andrew Sullivan said "Science cannot disprove true faith; because true faith rests on the truth; and science cannot be in ultimate conflict with the truth."

Isn't this begging the question? One cannot talk about "true faith" unless and until one has a means of determining whether faith is true. Sullivan also says that, at some point, faith has to "abandon reason for mystery", but at that point, doesn't it also abandon any means of determining whether it is true?

21. Halting progress

Comment #16924 by pauliej on January 9, 2007 at 3:57 pm

Go, Grayling, go!!

The issue here is about the human right of people to live their own lives in accordance with their own preferences; against the right of people to impose their preferences on others. There is, or should be, no contest.

22. Hybrid embryo work 'under threat'

Comment #16240 by pauliej on January 5, 2007 at 5:04 pm

According to the BBC, the public consultation included "scientists, medical bodies, patient representatives, ethicists and faith communities."

Really?? Whole faith communities? Or just their usually-unelected leaders?

Perhaps this would be a good time to start start a new e-petition on the Prime Minister's website, where those of us who were not consulted can register our objection to any ban on this research.