801. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75675 by Richard Morgan on October 3, 2007 at 9:37 am

Thanks for all the replies to my request for comments on

cognitive dissonance, the willing suspension of disbelief and cigarette smoking

I am wondering how many of you have spotted the relevance of this question to the subject which re-unites us all here.
Well, I gave up smoking a year ago after 37 years of addiction. (A method without patches, chewing-gum, hypnosis, acupuncture, medication or even will-power! I'll tell you about it if you ask but I'm not giving free ad space here)
And for many years I have noticed the similarities between the way people explain why they continue to believe in the face of all the evidence, and why smokers continue to poison themselves knowingly.
And this of course invites the next question : - how can one mock believers and at the same time chain-smoke and ingurgitate large quantities of alcohol?
Can we start a list of similar or perhaps identical answers to the questions :
Why do you believe in God? and
Why do you smoke?
You'll see, this will be a very interesting exercise. I think we will learn a lot about theists and cognitive dissonance.
I'll start the ball rolling:
1)My cigarette / My belief in God helps me to handle painful situations.
2) I have smoked/believed in God for so long I just can't imagine life without smoking/believing.

A vous, mes amis!!!

802. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75611 by Richard Morgan on October 3, 2007 at 6:13 am

Jack Rawlinson - you say you don't understand my argument.
In fact, that is because
a) My argument was very badly presented, (I had meant to say that heliocentrist T-shirts would have been a bit pointless at the beginning of the 17th century;)
b) Having been away from Britain for 25 years, my argument was also ill-informed.
However you do then go on to rather misrepresent the problem. This thread is concerned with the use of the word "Atheist", not whether we should allow the religites to take over our schools, our courts, our governments and our spouses or not.
I admire your combative spirit. I would be happy for my grand-daughter to marry somebody like you. But you don't need to call yourself an "Atheist" in order to oppose insidious intrusion by the God-lickers.
Tell me, are you opposed to excessive religious influence because you are an atheist, or because you are YOU and you have certain principles?
I rest my case.

803. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75594 by Richard Morgan on October 3, 2007 at 5:31 am

Jack Rawlinson:

It seems to me that it would be in the interest of the religious if we back down from describing ourselves as precisely what we are. That would be a win for them because it would make us look weak, appeasing, easily intimidated.

Philip1978

Plus I agree with Jack, withdrawal from the word would simply make the religious think they have won something or that I am not confident enough in my convictions.

Sorry, guys, but you are both wrong. Plain-long wrong, as we say here in Toulouse.
Why?
Because you are using pugilistic images - as if there were a combat, two opponents - result must be win or lose.
It just doesn't work like that in the real world.
Just how did civilised societies evolve from a geocentric vision of the universe to a heliocentric system? Can you imagine the pointlessness of "I'm a heliocentricist" T-shirts? And yet that Zeitgeist has been completely transformed. Truth has a way of filtering through, of becoming apparent even if it's conditional and temporary.
The refusal to use the word "atheist" could be seen as a simple message saying, "Well, in fact, there is nothing for me to be against."
Being excessively verbally combative can only strengthen the opposition. They will say to themselves, "He's hitting on me so hard I must be right."
Interesting question for you guys - since you assert the right to call yourselves "Atheists", for how long will you do so? Until all theism fizzles away and disappears? Until 51% of all Americans stop believing in the Celestial Pervert Dictator? Until God strikes you down with boils, frogs, palsy and another Republican President?
Be careful not to fall foul of the "The lady doth protest too much" attitude.

(PS I'm preparing an ad hominem. Anybody got any views on cognitive dissonance, the willing suspension of disbelief and cigarette smoking? And yes, I'm extremely serious here. Your reactions might just shut me up before I start, but I doubt it, because I suspect that we are dealing with similar neurological mechanisms here.)

804. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75563 by Richard Morgan on October 3, 2007 at 2:34 am

Hey! Wh*t's up with *ll the computer keybo*rds? Somebody h*s wrenched out the key for the letter...er, th*t comes before the letter "s".
I guess it's th*t S*m H*rris *g*in!
Yes, the guy who we*rs * T-shirt with * l*rge red *sterisk printed on it.

805. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75550 by Richard Morgan on October 3, 2007 at 1:37 am

Janus :

We need _a_ name for ourselves.

Yes, I can understand that - if you happen to be living in the USA. But (and I'm going to bore you about living in France again)for most people, atheism is the default attitude, and French atheists do not "need a name", just as they do not need to organise conventions in posh hotels.
I have already expressed this problem with the word "atheist" inthese columns a few months ago, but clearly one can not just make a word disappear. And certain situations demand a linguistic tag : in a largely theist culture, "atheism" is a word that has a rightful place in every-day language .
I suppose that we will need to use words like "theist" and "atheist" just like we have "smoker" and "non-smoker" - expressions which make no sense in the absence of tobacco!

Nobody ever asks me what I "believe" - not ever! Not on hospital admissions forms, not in cocktail parties, not on the beach....nowhere, never.
As a teacher, when I first became an over-zealous Dawkinsian I spent weeks rooting out the only practising Catholic on the staff in order to have somebody to browbeat with revelations about Mount Improbable!!!

One last little quibble with Sam, which he invites by emphasizing the importance of language, and the choice of words.

He uses "happiness" and "well-being" as if they were synonyms and thus interchangeable. Boris Cyrulnik has written about this :

Well-being is what we actually feel, here and now - I'm eating a good meal, I feel good, I'm not hungry, I'm not afraid. Happiness only exists as a representation; it's always the result of an elaboration. It needs to be worked on. It's "somewhere else" , in another time - it's almost always a Utopia. But the act of evoking verbally a particular Utopia can, and, does create a real sensation of well-being. And that makes people "happy". Everybody uses it - political parties, churches, sects (everybody is going to die, but as for us, thanks to our ritual, we're going to live after dying and we will at last discover Paradise etc etc) without forgetting car salesmen.

Strategies for attaining the feeling of well-being are clearly very useful and varied. Chasing the myth of "happiness" can only lead to disillusion and disappointment. Or the need to buy an even bigger and more powerful car.
So let's be a little more careful in our use of words, ok?
(For those who consider that I am nit-picking again : "Allez vous faire foutre!")

806. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #75340 by Richard Morgan on October 2, 2007 at 11:21 am

Thank you very much for the write-up, Jack.

807. Logical Path from Religious Beliefs to Evil Deeds

Comment #75289 by Richard Morgan on October 2, 2007 at 8:44 am

But they were religious, and that provided all the justification they needed to murder and destroy.

That is true, and truly frightening.
But I think that as a general rule, suicide bombers are not drawn from the educated classes. And whilst books like TGD are important, statistically the most effective weapons against fundamentalism are education and employment.
Where there is little formal education and high unemployment, there will fundamentalism thrive.
That the 9/11 assassins were well-educated is the exception rather than the rule.

808. There Go The Dinosaurs

Comment #74908 by Richard Morgan on October 1, 2007 at 5:12 am

Comment #74819 by Dr Benway
Most 16 year olds want some independence from their parents......
I wouldn't get upset about his going to the church just yet. Find out more about it. Maybe go with him.

Hm...independence from parents, exactly, but then "Maybe go with him"???
Well, whatever ...
tommccChances are he'll grow out of it. Just be cool. As an adolescent, the more he sees you getting uptight about it, the more appealing it will seem to him.
And continue to always give him the opposite of what evangelical christianity has to offer - the TRUTH.

809. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #74870 by Richard Morgan on October 1, 2007 at 12:38 am

bayareadudeYour post reminds me of several experiences I had as a young journalist over forty years ago. Since I had my "press card" I got to meet lots of "famous" people and I was usually shocked at the difference between the public persona and the real, live person with a hang-over and halitosis!
You'll get over it.
You need to realise that "being right" doesn't necessarily mean "being nice", and whilst RD has always come across as a brilliant person, I've never had the impression that he's a "nice" person (according to my very limited criteria) but what the heck?
Whenever I find somebody unpleasant on a one-to-one basis I usually suppose that it's on account of the effect I'm having on them. Who knows?
I don't know how long the RRS has been in existence, but even they will grow up one day.
And don't forget - you can be an atheist wherever you want,with whoever you want, and continue to spread the good word in your own way amongst people you can identify with and with whom you feel good!

810. Religion as a Force for Good

Comment #74618 by Richard Morgan on September 29, 2007 at 5:42 pm

Comment #74605 by mjwemdee
This article had absolutely nothing to say. It's like a mouthful of margarine.

Absolutely nothing? Well, not quite.
I checked out the original article in the LA Times, and discovered that the sub-heading had been omitted here on RD Net:

As the Burmese rebellion shows, it's often the faithful who are inspired to do great things.

Get it? The Burmese angle, that's what makes it interesting and copy-worthy.
It's an old journalistic trick, used to eke out a few column-inches in a news-paper - link up a topical debate and a current event and reveal a new (ha ha) "angle".
Also posting this article here helps ward off criticism from those who would accuse us of ignoring events where the heroes are religites.

811. Why Christians should take Richard Dawkins seriously

Comment #74562 by Richard Morgan on September 29, 2007 at 2:28 pm

WHY NO ONE SHOULD TAKE DIANELOS GEORGOUDIS SERIOUSLY

I think that DG should be taken extremely seriously - by genetic engineers. Let's analyse his genome to see if we can identify the marker that makes him immune to cognitive dissonance. Perhaps the WeeFlea also, while we're at it.
I believe Time magazine once had a series of articles entitles "The God gene" (not sure about this) but it could explain a lot.
What do you think?
I mean, can there be any other explanation?

812. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #74475 by Richard Morgan on September 29, 2007 at 3:39 am

dlitt

What a bizarre and unexpected phenomenon is this ascending religiosity.

Neither bizarre nor unexpected. In fact, it's not as "ascending" as all that. Many social phenomena seem to be "ascending" simply because improved communication and sources of information allow us to be more aware of what is happening in the world.
Haven't you noticed that the catholic church became more insistent about it's geocentric vision of the universe not long after Galileo started making his heretical heliocentric claims?
And whether you be electro or hip-hop, in spite of my 61 years, I organise a bunch of DJs/Mixers here in France. You youngsters - go have a listen:
http://www.myspace.com/frenchmixers2

813. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74398 by Richard Morgan on September 28, 2007 at 2:47 pm

brother john

But, as a Christian, in a Christian context, I want clear distinction between opinion and what Christ said.

Excellent point. In my area of research, I too go to great lengths to distinguish between subjective opinion and what the Flying Spaghetti Monster really said. There can indeed be a world of difference between hearsay, the oral tradition on one hand, and verifiable quotations on the other. We here have this problem with the fact that all the versions of the pastoptic gospels were written down in tomato sauce many years after the passing of the FSM into eternity.
I'd be interested to know how you determine the veracity of what Christ is purported to have said. This would help me recover all those students of mine who are increasingly tempted by Macaronity and other evil sects.

814. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74319 by Richard Morgan on September 28, 2007 at 5:41 am

Goatsbane J

It seems perfectly made for moving the audience to indulge in that arm gesture that, when I was a church goer, I used to observe and privately refer to as 'warming one's hands on the fire of god'.

I'm glad you've brought this subject up. Many aspects of so-called "worship" behaviour evoke regressive attitudes, and obviously, the affects that accompany them.
When we were tiny, it was with that gesture that we asked mummy or daddy to pick us up. And usually they did. So the simple act of extending the arms heavenwards, palms turned up, will give us all sorts of cosy feelings - that in reality go back a long way in our personal history. Nothing to do with God the father or the Holy Spirit - sorry about that.
To be honest, I enjoy all that kind of emotional, sentimental stuff so much, I'd like to become a pastor, but I've been told that being an atheist would probably be a handicap more than anything else.
What do you think?
I mean, I'm a good preacher and a highly polished hypocrite in real life, and
I'm a musician and
I have the gift of tongues : English, French, Portuguese and Welsh. (Apparently Adam and Eve spoke Welsh because an ancient Talmudic document says "Adam and Eve spake a tongue that no man could comprehend.)
Why should being an atheist be a problem when I've got all that going for me? Or am I missing the point here?

815. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74190 by Richard Morgan on September 27, 2007 at 3:45 pm

revcort

I have difficulty justifying spending money (which is in short supply with 4 kids), on books that aren't directly related to faith.

You have four children, money is in short supply, but you still manage to spend some of it on faith books??? Do you really spend money out of the family budget on books related to "faith" silliness?
Be warned - every time you buy a faith-related book, God kills a leprechaun.

816. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74187 by Richard Morgan on September 27, 2007 at 3:28 pm

Northern Bright

It's a terrible way to go through life and I sincerely hope that one day you see it for the monstrous nonsense it really is and reject it. And that you then find some way of undoing the damage you've done to your "students" over the years.

Steven Weinberg

"(Religion) With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion"

It is probably easier to unweave a rainbow than to undo all the harm that has been done in the name of religion.
I try to go through life with an attitude of "hating the sin but loving the sinner". Revcort reminds me to include the other case - healing the sick wherever possible.
But just let me add one remark - in these discussions, most of you come across as highly intelligent, mostly rational, often wise and sometimes well-read and witty.
But it has taken an overdose of revcort for many of you show that you are also kind, patient, understanding, compassionate, forgiving and (dare I use the "L" word) loving.
Because many religions talk about love, and this is often much more enticing than cold reason or a marvellous Hubble photo.

People don't care how much you know,
Until they know how much you care.

Why, I'll bet Jesus even loves leprechauns.

817. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74115 by Richard Morgan on September 27, 2007 at 9:21 am

Northern Bright

...there's something very odd going on.

Yes.
Or rather - no.
Unfortunately it's not odd at all. It's called religion.
For many years I was a highly respected, much-in-demand lay preacher (forgive me for not revealing the name of the religion in question, nor the country where I wreaked my righteous havoc) and yet in reality, as you have noticed, I am a cantankerous ol' sod.
When you're a pastor, being a two-faced hypocrite goes with the job, I'm afraid.
In fact when I compare myself with David WeeFlea the main difference is that he's wrong about God and I'm not. The other difference is that I would be thrilled to be proven wrong. But I'm not holding my breath.

818. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #74051 by Richard Morgan on September 27, 2007 at 6:01 am

revcort

The reason I know this is because He has saved a weak, pitiful fool like me.

That sounds like a fairly accurate self-description there, revcort.
Luckily for you, you'll find that most of the folk who post here are infinitely more tolerant, intellligent and forgiving than your Biblical Sky-Dictator. (I'm not one of them because I'm thinking about all the harm you may be doing in your real life with these ideas of yours.)
Talking about getting messages from God - have you seen the Luc Besson film version of the story of Joan of Arc?
Off-topic?
Sorry, just trying to make you feel better.

819. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74042 by Richard Morgan on September 27, 2007 at 5:44 am

Billy Sands

Shame he has a problem with sticking things up his bum

Tell me - how do you know? Not even with the Vaseline of the willing suspension of disbelief?

Northern Bright : I suspect that many of us manifest different aspects of our personalities according to the context. I think even I would probably be a lot less aggressive if I were in the process of writing a book. And if you met me in real life (touching wood here) you'd see quite another kind of person - polite, friendly, warm, interested, engaging, charming, conciliatory, witty, amusing, self-effacing - and lots of other things that could never guess from reading my posts. And that makes three different aspects to begin with. When I used to be interviewed by folks from the telly (yep - used to happen in a "previous life") I think I came across as yet another kind of person.

Then I started the treatment for my schizophrenia...

I mean, heck, even God changes personality between the Old and New Testaments, and then at least once more when he meets up with and allows himself to be influenced by Saul aka Paul.
And he's God, for Christ's sake... er, manner of speaking.

Yep, I know, as a general rule women are less prone to putting on acts like this than men, so you may find this explanation rather remote from your own experience. Unless you're married or in a couple with a man, and you've sometimes had to ask him why he came home later than expected...
Who knows? Perhaps even our WeeFlea comes across as somebody warm, sensible,intelligent and well-read when he's in front of his parishioners. Could happen.
And this part-time teacher who apparently (!!!) got fired for calling the Adam and Eve myth... a myth. I wonder if we know the whole story about him....
Newspapers, like married men can be useful but are not always as reliable as we would like them to be. (And I am not, repeat NOT making an indirect reference to pewkatchoo whatever he may believe. Heck, I even like and admire the guy!)

820. Why are we Muslims so self-destructive?

Comment #73968 by Richard Morgan on September 27, 2007 at 12:23 am

kaiserkiss You're right.
Thank you for that reminder.
Knickers untwisted.
Normal service may resume.

We should not fall into the same trap as the religious fanatics, or is that just another unavoidable human characteristic we try to suppress, sometimes with less success??

I guess so...*sighs*

821. Why are we Muslims so self-destructive?

Comment #73464 by Richard Morgan on September 25, 2007 at 3:17 am

Prufrock

Try to remember we are simply evaluating ideas, not people.

In my part of the world "ideas" are things that "people" have, they don't just happen on their own, in a neat, impersonal way. And sometimes "people" have "ideas" that push them to slitting children's throats in front of their mothers, before the mother is gang-raped and slaughtered herself.

Suicide bombers are "people" with "ideas" - or hadn't you noticed?

Oh dear, I've just discovered why you go on about "disembodied" people. I've just clicked on your pseudo to try to learn a little more about you, and look what turns up:

The requested user does not exist.

This time, as far as Prufrock is concerned, I really and finally rest my case.

822. Why are we Muslims so self-destructive?

Comment #73431 by Richard Morgan on September 25, 2007 at 2:07 am

Goldy and HunterZolomon

"Best" posters? Eloquent posters or people with the same opinion as you? Evidence please.

Yes, I myself was unhappy with the adjective "best". I think I was talking about sound reasoning. (My English is often a little inadequate - I'm sorry about that.)

Surely you recognize the value in allowing people to post behind a pseudonym.

I most certainly do. But I think that sometimes we need to "stand up and be counted".

Some people may not want their name splashed out for a reason.

I think that people who hide always do so for a reason - resistance fighters, for example.
But it is still clear to me that internet fora have become a haven for cowards and sneerers..
Tell me, how many people do you admire who have always remained hidden behind a pseudonym? (You're not allowed to count God here, ok?)

823. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #73318 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 5:32 pm

I love this guy, but still prefer Rowan Atkinson.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eJA9RPX9mRY

824. Talking Action Figure Jesus

Comment #73276 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 4:15 pm

I'm looking forward to seeing their Adam and Eve.
Especially Eve.



EDIT : Aw, shucks, I just did. But I meant before the Fall. After is just too plain-long boring!




EDIT 2 : But only to see if they had belly buttons - you bunch of faithless perverts!!!!

825. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73166 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 10:19 am

37; Comment #73157 by Bonzai
Nitpicking over grammar and spelling on internet fora is either an occupational hazard for English teachers or the past time of old foggies who have nothing valuable to say,--the type who write to newspaper editors frequently to whine about minor breaches in grammatical correctness. English grammar is just a convention, nothing more.

Good grief, you can be a humourless bunch sometimes.

826. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73154 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 9:42 am

24. Comment #73127 by Dr Benway:
Maybe even a cooking show about foods we don't normally eat.

From my experience, most cooking shows are about foods we don't normally eat!
You and I, Dr B. are cynical ol' sods. We don't have the angelic enthusiasm of recent converts to atheism.
We patronisingly listen to the Veroniques and Northern Brights of this site , and it's as if we are inwardly saying, "How cute - they'll grow out of it one day." They display this "jolly hockey-sticks", Head-Girl sort of enthusiasm : "OK chaps, tomorrow morning we change the world, and in the afternoon, Orienteering for everybody in the car-park behind the Odeon."
I am;once again reminded of that marvellous, "fake" ancient poem, "Desiderata"

As far as possible, without surrender,

be on good terms with all persons.

Speak your truth quietly and clearly;

and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant;

they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons;

they are vexatious to the spirit.

827. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73147 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 9:17 am

No Quarter

Heaven and Earth has thankfully been cancelled.

My English is far from perfect, but shouldn't that be "Heaven and Earth have been cancelled"? Like the old Beyond The Fringe joke, isn't it : "The Earth will be totally destroyed tomorrow at mid-day : tomorrow has been declared a Day of Morning."

Veronique

It could be a consciousness-raising programme that encompasses much more and very interesting bits and pieces.

Oops - for regular TV programmes, the reasoning works in the opposite way : you finance a programme when consciousness has already been raised, not the other way around. RD's TV programmes were relatively successful one-offs, but the Zeitgeist was ready for them.
I found your list of topics jolly interesting, but reading those subjects would have most young people zapping directly to Disney Channel.

828. Crisis of faith in first secular school

Comment #73075 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 3:35 am

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fTzXJMU1sLc

829. Scientific Literacy and the Habit of Discourse

Comment #73048 by Richard Morgan on September 24, 2007 at 1:00 am

Changing one's mind is the essence of intellectual growth.

Of course that's true. The article is excellent and complete.
However we are left with one sad problem - instilling or encouraging the desire to "grow" intellectually. Does anybody have a method that works?

830. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #72950 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 3:54 pm

Plus ça change...

831. Why Christians should take Richard Dawkins seriously

Comment #72904 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 11:47 am

I suppose the probability of the earth, the entire universe, all creatures great and small and Russell Blackford and me being created by a super-intelligence which orders some of its creatures to chop off the foreskins of baby boys must be at least 1/10^40000.
Or... 1?
I need the statisticians to help me out here, please.

832. Crisis of faith in first secular school

Comment #72898 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 11:24 am

Richard Dawkins

His address is:-

Dr Paul Kelley
Headmaster, Monkseaton High School
Seatonville Road
Whitley Bay
Tyne and Wear
England NE25 9EQ

Hey you guys - welcome to the 21st century!


http://www.monkseaton.org.uk/


Save the TREES! Send an e-mail, please.

833. Crisis of faith in first secular school

Comment #72832 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 5:33 am

the Great teapot and Newton30
Thank you.
From the bottom of my heart.
Merci.
Du fond du coeur.
Hey, Russell - loosen up a bit!

834. Why Christians should take Richard Dawkins seriously

Comment #72800 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 2:14 am

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGH!!!!

Please stop replying to Dianelos Georgoudis - you're only encouraging him!!!!

835. Monkeys show sense of justice

Comment #72799 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 2:11 am

Northern Bright : You're talking about "The Cucumber Delusion", right?
Oh, and somewhere else you related an amusing anecdote , introducing it with an apology for being "off-topic". Well, you weren't "off-topic' at all, since your recipe for beef stew is an irrefutable argument against Intelligent Design!

836. Crisis of faith in first secular school

Comment #72792 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 1:50 am

Bremas :

They were using it as proof that a secular society doesn't make it scientifically literate.

So what?
It's no secret that in all the PISA comparative studies published to date, the French Education system does rather poorly. The French motto is "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." - no mention of "scientifically literate" there, as far as I can see.
The point is that whatever else may happen to French kids at school, they don't get religious doctrine forced on them.
As far as I know it's possible to be a scientifically illiterate atheist...innit?

EDIT:

Russell Blackford

Sometimes I really hate journalists. I want precise information and instead get these waffly stories written in the ghastly "inverted pyramid" style that they are taught to use in order to pander to the short attention spans of cretins.

Never heard of the KISS formula for journalists? Anyway, thank you for explaining the brevity of your posts, it's always nice to know.
(LOL)

EDIT 2

But the video is an eye opener I was always under the impression that the French were perfect.

The French have this same impression.

837. Crisis of faith in first secular school

Comment #72782 by Richard Morgan on September 23, 2007 at 12:46 am

There's still lots of reasonably priced property for sale here in the South of France... and all State schools are 100% secular - no daily grovelling sessions required.

838. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72779 by Richard Morgan on September 22, 2007 at 11:57 pm

EastCoastAtheist

Listen to the audience response after that line, and you'll notice that people are applauding more than they are laughing. I don't know if thinking people in America would necessarily split their sides over such a line, but they would definitely appreciate that somebody was saying it on television. I don't know what television is like in other countries, but these sorts of comments are very taboo here. If a 'rationalist' laughs, it's probably because they are thinking of all the people who are taking offence.

Thank you, very sincerely, for this explanation.
As Bertrand Russell has remarked (Saturday Evening Post, 3 June 1944): 'It is a misfortune for Anglo-American friendship that the two countries are supposed to have a common language', without forgetting my fellow countryman , Dylan Thomas, in a radio talk "European writers and scholars in America are up against the barrier of a common language".
There are also considerable cultural differences that we Britishers need to understand.
I don't know if RD's publishers are planning a French translation of TGD, because to my mind it would not interest many French people, simply because we don't have those taboos here in France.

839. Why Christians should take Richard Dawkins seriously

Comment #72777 by Richard Morgan on September 22, 2007 at 11:35 pm

mis_spelled

Help me to explain to her that she is the reason she got pregnant with me not god. She said she prayed that she would get pregnant. I know that the reason that she got pregnant was that she stopped taking the pill.

Well, not really.
The reason that she got pregnant was that she had unprotected sex with a biologically adult male. Stopping taking the pill allowed her to become impregnated, but YOU are here amongst us because an accommodating ovum and an enterprising spermatozoa happened to be in the right place at the right time!
If my remark seems to be flippant and beside the point, let me explain that I am mentioning this because your incomplete reasoning reminds me a little of the "God-of-the-gaps" reasoning : God exists because there is no other explanation.
You will notice that here on this site, we all help each other to avoid falling into fallacies and the like.

Concerning getting angry with your Mum, let me just quote from "Desiderata"

As far as possible, without surrender,
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons;
they are vexatious to the spirit.

Keep posting. And stop answering the phone!

840. Monkeys show sense of justice

Comment #72746 by Richard Morgan on September 22, 2007 at 3:29 pm

I think that it is important to take into account the social context of such behaviours. If that experiment had been carried out in France, I'm sure the slighted monkey would immediately have gone on strike and staged a demo.
Or if it had been a born-again Christian fundie-monkey, it would have tried to exorcize the experimenters.
An Anglican monkey would have forced itself to eat the cucumber, and look as if it were enjoying it just as long as the experimenters were looking on.
A Freudian monkey would have contented itself with pieces of a phallic cucumber,while worrying about the other monkey's unresolved Oedipus complex.
Whereas a rationalist monkey would have given everything a neo-Darwinian explanation and written a book entitled "God is not Grape".

841. Poll: Are Dawkins and Hitchens good for humanism?

Comment #72726 by Richard Morgan on September 22, 2007 at 1:16 pm

Yes, Messrs. Dawkins and Hitchens have helped to advance the cause of humanism.
So have Cornwell, McGrath and more recently Madge Midgley.
And, to a lesser extent, you (dear Reader) and I.
And even Northern Bright!!

842. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #72627 by Richard Morgan on September 22, 2007 at 1:39 am

I really enjoy Bill Maher. But I absolutely must visit the USA sometime soon in order to get the feel of a country where people will actually split their sides laughing at lines like:
"Santa Claus and Jesus are really the same guy"
(PS Does anybody know where I can buy Magic Mormon Underwear? And does it have the same effect as Viagra?)

843. Against the grain: There are questions that science cannot answer

Comment #72432 by Richard Morgan on September 21, 2007 at 4:18 am

Northern Bright:

This is horribly off-topic.

Not at all! Your recipe for beef stew is an extremely convincing argument against Intelligent Design.

844. Is 'Do Unto Others' Written Into Our Genes?

Comment #72431 by Richard Morgan on September 21, 2007 at 4:11 am

Comment #72395 by pewkatchoo
As I keep saying to my wife, who is a catholic, guilt is not morality.

She's probably reasoning like all those good ladies who look at their husbands, raise their eyes to the heavens, and ask "What have I done to deserve that?" Since she's been "punished" she must therefore be "guilty".
Q.E.D. and/or blame her brain.

845. Against the grain: There are questions that science cannot answer

Comment #72069 by Richard Morgan on September 20, 2007 at 9:01 am

Comment #72063 by pewkatchoo on September 20, 2007 at 8:50 am
Northern Bright
You are an absolute joy in an otherwise bleak existence. You and Veronique have an infectiously effervescent view of life.

Evidence, please.

846. Against the grain: There are questions that science cannot answer

Comment #72014 by Richard Morgan on September 20, 2007 at 6:14 am

mmurray

Take Frances Collins for example.

No thank you, you can keep him!


I've just checked out the original article. This somewhat reassured me:

Also in this section
* My First Job: Jenny Eclair, star of 'Grumpy Old Women', was a life model

Madge Midgeley and grumpy old women in the same section? Yeah, makes sense to me.Maybe it's Grumpy Old Women's Day soon or something like that.
Reading this piece reminded me of a description of a woman in one of Frédéric Dard's (Sanantonio) books:

On lisait sur son visage l'amertume d'une femme qui a trop joui sans baiser, et qui a trop baisé sans jouir.

(Google translates the verb "baiser" as "to kiss". Yeah, well, it also had that meaning not so long ago...)


EDIT: Oops - I've just noticed my mis-spelling of "Midgley". Must have been because I took it for an adverb instead of a surname. Sorry about that, Midge, er, oops, Madge!

847. Atheists for Jesus

Comment #71502 by Richard Morgan on September 19, 2007 at 12:15 am

Shane McKee:
Personally, I think that if Jesus had been around today, he would have been an atheist. sounds a lot like "personally, I think that if Jesus had been around today, he would not have believed in himself."

"Atheists for Jesus" T-shirts are interesting in the same way as those T-shirts vaunting the fact that Carrefour is an "official sponsor" for the Rugby World Cup. Who is the winner in this unlikely association? Clearly it is Carrefour exploiting the popularity of Rugby in France.

So, who wants to wear a T-shirt exploiting the popularity of the Jesus myth? Atheists?
Aw, c'mon...
Why not "Vegetarians for MacDonalds" or "Greenpeace for Shell"?
This is certainly one of the silliest ideas to come out of that formerly brilliant biologist's mind.
Yes, I know, we're none of us getting any younger, but all the same...
Also, just a kindly word of warning here:

Could we achieve exponential amplification of the numbers of super nice people?

We?
"We" being this generation? Or "we" being the followers of Richard Dawkins?

848. Larry King Interviews Kathy Griffin

Comment #71365 by Richard Morgan on September 18, 2007 at 2:34 pm

Big John

I love Kathy Griffin!!!!

Me too!!! I just want to thank Jesus for giving me a computer and inventing the Internet and YouTube so I could see this clip.
This would not have been possible if He'd been wasting His time saving lives in Darfur.

849. The Nonbelievers

Comment #71174 by Richard Morgan on September 18, 2007 at 1:47 am

Rachel Holmes

The last thing I want, when I die, is...

Thank you for that one, Rachel, it's one of the best.
I'm making a collection, and I'll post them all when I notice that you guys are taking yourselves too seriously... again.
But I'm not going to knock the idea of an "atheist pastor", because I have been looking for ideas on how to keep myself busy during retirement.
"Saving Souls for pleasure and profit the godless way" sounds like fun to me.

850. Religious education

Comment #71169 by Richard Morgan on September 18, 2007 at 1:29 am

Order a copy of Philip Beadle's book Could do Better: Help your Child Shine at School

When I was young, many years ago, and sent to Sunday school on a regular basis, one of the hymns we were forced to sing was :
Jesus bids us shine
With a pure, clear light,
Like a little candle
Burning in the night.
In this world of darkness
So let us shine—
You in your small corner,
And I in mine.
Nowadays I am invited to call myself a "Bright" - which, I suppose, entitles me to "shine".
Help me out here, please, do I shine waves or particles?