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

Comment #70855 by Flagellant on September 17, 2007 at 4:51 am

Dawkins is a God-denier (I loved the idea expressed here that this was a very, very sheer brand of stockings/tights/pantyhose).
Atheists hate God.
Atheists cannot see God when he's all around.
Dawkins is the devil...

But why should we help?


Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

102. Honest Mistakes or Willful Mendacity

Comment #70852 by Flagellant on September 17, 2007 at 4:34 am

Many thanks, Northern Bright. I appreciate that you noticed my sorrow as well as felt my pain ;-)

I'm pretty sure that several of the assembled company indicated that they have read(?) the Wee Flea's book. I also recall that (most of) it's on line and that it has been dealt with point-by-point by some of our very patient posters, posting to another site. So it might not be too difficult for them to relive their tussles for a wider audience.

As for the thought that one could possibly, in all good conscience, review a book without ever having read it, I couldn't possibly comment. But when you see suspiciously adoring reviews, written in very general terms, of a book denigrating TGD, I can understand when the impulse to carry out a little reciprocal sabotage 'record-straightening' may become almost impossible to resist.



Truly, god is grott, merdeiful.

103. Honest Mistakes or Willful Mendacity

Comment #70827 by Flagellant on September 17, 2007 at 3:20 am

Following Northern Bright's lead, I acquired a copy of Darwin's Angel and posted the following, slightly edited, review on the UK Amazon site:

I approached this book with some glee; it has generally had good reviews and I had high hopes of it. There have been several previous books, attempting serious criticisms of Richard Dawkins's highly popular (currently 51 weeks on the US 'Bestseller list') The God Delusion. These earlier books disappointed me; they either failed to rebut Dawkins, they misrepresented him or, it appeared, their authors had not read TGD. So, how does Cornwell's Darwin's Angel compare? Unlike other writers, Cornwell has clearly read TGD; but to what effect? I had some surprises. The seraph writes:

Two natural philosophers, Diderot and d'Holbach, invoked atheism in reaction to theology's continued sway over physics, mathematics and medicine. These philosophers… were convinced that the autonomy of the sciences must be achieved by denying the existence of God. (DA, p. 158)

This misrepresents the French Enlightenment. The philosophes railed against the Church (not 'theology') for its stifling of rational inquiry and it's cruel, authoritarian nature. In writing the Encyclopedie, the attempt to record the sum of human knowledge at the time, the philosophes did not 'deny the existence of God' to achieve the autonomy of science; some may have concluded 'there is no God' but others, perhaps the majority, were actually Deists and believed in a non-interventionist, non-personal God. And the Encyclopedie was about far more than science alone.

You may not see this as important and think that such differences do not matter. But they do. It is an example of how Cornwell twists things. Virtually the whole of Chapter 10 is a misrepresentation of Dawkins's writing about Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.

Then there is Chapter 4, the 'Beauty' argument. Here, the seraph again wilfully misunderstands Dawkins's position but, as for Chapter 10, you would have to read TGD yourself to understand. Here's just a snippet, where you can see that Cornwell doesn't give the whole picture:

It seems perfectly understandable, doesn't it, that an artist should be moved by a religious story without necessarily adhering to orthodox beliefs. Could anyone doubt that…the music of Mozart's Requiem was influenced by the liturgy of the Mass of the Dead? (DA, p. 18)

Well, you also have to understand patronage. Forget Amadeus here. Because Mozart – an Enlightenment figure par excellence - was hard up at the time, he was probably more influenced by the promise of a large fee from Count Walsegg-Stuppach who commissioned the work.

Finally, here's some more and obvious mis-attribution. Dawkins writes of the Amish, parodying and ridiculing an implied legal opinion thus:

... you quaint little people with your bonnets and breeches, your horse buggies, your archaic dialect and your earth-closet privies, you enrich our lives. Of course you must be allowed to trap your children with you in your seventeenth-century time warp, otherwise something irretrievable would be lost to us: a part of the wonderful diversity of human culture. (TGD, p. 331; DA, p.107)

Cornwell's seraph put these words into Dawkins's mouth when it is perfectly clear from the text that Dawkins is attributing that naïve view to the US Supreme Court that decided that children from the Amish community need not have a proper education.

The seraph, with extraordinary effrontery, then holds up the Amish as paragons of resource conservation. In this respect, the Amish and the Unabomber (remember him?) have a lot in common. His manifesto begins: 'The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.' If one really wants to preserve the Amish lifestyle, why not consign it to the Epcot Centre in Disneyworld? There is a museum, 'Blists Hill Victorian Town', at Ironbridge in Shropshire UK, the cradle of the Industrial Revolution. Costumed people greet visitors and point out primitive aspects of their ancestors' lives. But they take off their costumes and return to a proper life in the evenings. The Amish children do not have this choice.

In his preface, Cornwell is explicit that he intends '…not so much to pick a fight…as to offer a few 'grace notes'…and…glosses in the interests of sharper logic, closer insight, and factual accuracy' (DA p. 18). Well, phooey! If logic equals caprice, insight equals obfuscation and factual accuracy equals wilful misrepresentation, then he's on target. His seraph is facile, ethereal and dishonest. If you read Darwin's Angel, you will find a travesty of Dawkins's views and, if you accept Cornwell's misrepresentations, you will find yourself very badly informed by his perversions. Dawkins is vulnerable in several areas: the supposed evolutionary value of religion, the nature of 'evidence', and the diverse nature of faith, for example. He draws no distinction between 'reasonable faith' and 'blind faith' and his reasoning for conflating them, particularly in relation to terrorism, is incomplete. If you want to be able to refute Dawkins's arguments, you would be wiser to buy The God Delusion instead and make your own judgements.

-----------

On UK Amazon, Darwin's Angel started with several reviews, all suspiciously giving it five stars. Now, there are several others, out of a total of 16, that are not exactly over the moon and it has fallen below The God Delusion (with 581) in the star ratings stakes. It would thus not take many more 'poor' reviews to depress Darwin's Angel further. On the other hand, it would be difficult to affect TGD either way.

A quick look at the other 'flea' books shows a particularly high rating for David Robertson's The Dawkins Letters: Challenging Atheist Myths from very few (6), unanimously positive, reviews. It wouldn't take many dissenting opinions to alter that rating considerably. I don't think anyone could complain if people were to add a few more reviews. Mind you, this is only a passing thought and I don't have Northern Bright's brass neck to be able to make such an overt suggestion. However, perhaps I should temper my reticence by pointing out that the headline to one of the DL reviews proclaims: 'The Dawkins Letters now outselling The God Delusion'.


Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

104. Review of Darwin's Angel

Comment #70326 by Flagellant on September 15, 2007 at 12:16 am

Nice piece of filleting, Theocrapcy (48). A very unsatisfactory review, from so many angles.

I have a tiny confession to make. I have 'liberated' a copy of Darwin's Angel. A quick perusal seems to suggest that it is as full of disinformation as poor Northern Bright says it is, here and elsewhere.

Unless you are a masochist, as I so clearly am, or an atheist libel lawyer, please have care with this book.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

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

Comment #70322 by Flagellant on September 14, 2007 at 11:43 pm

This is excellent news. My hazy understanding about UK charity tax law is that an organisation undertaking 'political' activity cannot have charitable status. Watch out for the resulting opposing campaign, not necessarily 'charitable', (lol) to have both RD Foundations declared 'political', as well as 'nasty to god.'

I'm sure that this has been thoroughly examined, though. It would be tragic to find that, as a result of having achieved charitable status, there was some restriction on religion- , religiosi- , and faith- bashing.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private

106. Honest Mistakes or Willful Mendacity

Comment #70093 by Flagellant on September 14, 2007 at 4:05 am

Many thanks, Northern Bright for the implicit suggestion that I should incorporate your unused critical remarks in my review. I could have ethical difficulty with writing a 'hearsay' review, but I really appreciate your thoughtfulness in trying to keep me out of harm's way. Your generosity is of such a kind that I think you might well also be entitled, during your wild spree, to drop litter, use intemperate language, and permit your pooch to pollute the pavement.


Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.

107. Religion's Real Child Abuse

Comment #70075 by Flagellant on September 14, 2007 at 2:28 am

Oops, gazzalw1 (40), I think you may find that a single obol was placed on the lips (not the eyelids) or, more likely, under the tongues of the dead...



Signed

Charon
Chief Styx Ferryman


Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

108. Honest Mistakes or Willful Mendacity

Comment #70072 by Flagellant on September 14, 2007 at 1:42 am

I, too, have let Amazon.co.uk know that I found Northern Bright's review (100) helpful. Mind you, there are some other Amazon reviews that are, shall we say, less equivocal. Perhaps that means that I shall have to make further efforts to 'acquire' (sic) Cornwell's offering. I mean, I couldn't really review it without having read it, could I? People just don't do that sort of thing...



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

109. The Atheists Interviews

Comment #69946 by Flagellant on September 13, 2007 at 9:26 am

Sorry you had difficulty, walk. I always check that the links work before and after posting. I did this today, but I've just done it again and I agree about the message. The little link, at the bottom of the original post, still works, though. Here's another link from Richard Dawkins's site to the same material: http://richarddawkins.net/article,303,Reading-of-The-God-Delusion-in-Lynchburg-VA,Richard-Dawkins--C-SPAN2.

I've checked this one, too. [I've just done it again and it still works.] You'll have to look within it for the appropriate stuff but it's not difficult. For the moment I specifically refer to, click on 'Click here to watch this great moment!'

(The link you've given, walk, is the reading part and the questions but it's a bit long. Nevertheless, it's very interesting. If you go to about 1hr 40mins on your link, you'll get the great moment there, too. )




If an ISP can mess up a link, it/they will. Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.
[Edited only with respect to link information.]

110. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69942 by Flagellant on September 13, 2007 at 9:05 am

As long ago as comment 4, steve99 mentioned C. P. Snow and his Two cultures and the scientific revolution. I have always thought that Snow's analysis was right. Having had a foot in both camps, I find the notion that those with a science background are 'clear-thinking' to be a reasonable, but not absolute, generalisation. I have also found that those of a literary bent lack understanding of evidence-based arguments. But there may be ways to reconcile these extremes and draw together some of the points made earlier.

I recently recalled the origin of Snow's 'Two Cultures' (and this isn't the way the literature currently describes it, but I think it may be more accurate). In a discussion between Snow and F. R. Leavis, the Cambridge literary critic, Leavis remarked on how ignorant science students were about the plays of Shakespeare. Snow retorted 'So, what do your students know of the second law of thermodynamics?' This turned into a long-term spat and Leavis produced a paper Two cultures? The significance of C. P. Snow – an almost entirely ad hominem polemic, in response to 'The Two Cultures'. It was not Leavis's finest work.

Leavis, virtually single handed, had raised the status of literary criticism in England to worthwhile academic levels but he was challenged by Rene Wellek to explain the criteria by which he, Leavis, did his analysis. Leavis's Liberal Humanism was open to many charges: that it wasn't seriously analytical, all a matter of opinion and that the 'study' of a work often consisted of simple paraphrasing, for example.

Out of this dispute came a plethora of literary theories: structuralism, deconstruction, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, feminism, Marxism, stylistics… the list of literary theories is almost endless. (Perhaps the most misguided result of all was cultural relativism: 'If it's cultural, it's all right'.) It was as though the Arts people had recognised the value of the scientific method and tried to introduce it into literary theory. Success was limited, but there is scope for further work.

Whether consciously or not, those who maintain that there are 'other truths than those that can be verified experimentally', are perhaps trying naïvely to apply the scientific method, rather than to decry it. Are we too hard on them? I think we can accept that 'religious truths' can be taken metaphorically, but we must insist that they do not come anywhere near scientific truths; a religious 'truth', whether derived from scripture or intuited, must be deemed of lesser value, given its untestable provenance.

My guess is that the very concept 'scientific truth' is anathema to people whose disciplines have no such touchstone. This is not to belittle the Arts – it is rather to suggest that Science has more to teach the Arts than vice versa. But while the 'god-hopers' insist that they can tell us things about god, it is arrogant of them to do so. If they were to modify their approach to a more agnostic position, it might be possible to have more meaningful, and less abusive, conversations. (But this means, of course, that they ought to preach 'the doubtfulness of god's existence' to their flocks.) The scientific position may be seen as arrogant too, but it has such an extraordinary array of confirming and supporting knowledge, that it is entitled to its haughtiness. But how scientists can be god-hopers is quite beyond me...

I am always amazed, too, that the religiosi, supported by bugger-all very little, can claim absolute certainty, while science offers its immense structure of interlocking knowledge and explanation as merely contingent.



Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.

111. The Atheists Interviews

Comment #69708 by Flagellant on September 12, 2007 at 10:32 am

Yes, good idea, Mr C! On the matter of adapting tone to venue/audience, I watched a recent You Tube video of RD talking at Randolph-Macon Women's College, Lynchburg VA, close to Liberty University, that august institution founded by the thoroughly charming Jerry Falwell (RIS). Here's the link to the questions bit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR_z85O0P2M&mode=related&search=. At least half of the audience seemed to be 'normal'.

At question time, there were many fundy questions from Falwell's lot. Richard answered them all with considerable restraint and patience. The last question, AFAIR, from a 'Libertarian', was particularly silly but it gave Richard the opportunity to say something like 'Well, you could always go to a proper university.' It brought the house down.

By saving his one derogatory remark to the end, although his patience must have been fraying well before then, the serious and considered answers that he'd given to the previous questions left a very sound impression. Had he gone on a turkey shoot earlier, this would have been impossible. Everybody, the fundies included, learnt quite a bit about 'real' evolution and something of style, too, as a result.





Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.
[Edited for sense and 'readability'. Also, this link: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2006/11/not_a_trivial_e.html added. It is a very short clip that has the 'proper university' question and answer only. I'm sorry it's not'clickable' but cutting and pasting works.]

112. The Atheists Interviews

Comment #69695 by Flagellant on September 12, 2007 at 8:32 am

Many thanks for that, bouwe (32). I had noticed Duff's (18) comment and I was wondering what to say. I had edited my piece down from a much longer post so perhaps I'd left some of the argument, that you both amplify, behind. For example, I was deducing from my own experience in dumping the baggage. (So if Happy Hominid wants to ask me anything, I've got nothing to hide and I remember lots. Lol) I think we have to be constantly thinking 'What are we trying to do?' I guess the answer to that is to 'un-delude' people but there are many ways to do that...

hungarianelephant (26) raised the subject of (contemplation of) death. About twelve years ago, I had major heart surgery and, beforehand, I thought about death and dying. It never occurred to me to 'backslide': instead, I concentrated on being totally ready for the op. My atheism was a very positive part of the whole experience. It was further strengthened by surviving. And to cap it all, I chose to come round to one of my favourite pieces of music: Mozart's Requiem - a rude signal to both 'god' and superstition. Speaking very subjectively, I don't see a problem with death.

I've been to lots of non-religious celebrations of the lives of deceased friends; invariably, the occasion has been wonderful. On another thread, someone asked about what to do about one's funeral. Well, it's my ambition to have none of my friends and family at my funeral, having outlived them all (lol). In the event that some of them are still around, my instruction to them is 'Do what you like, whatever comforts you. I'm not going to notice, or complain, whatever you do...'




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

113. The Atheists Interviews

Comment #69530 by Flagellant on September 11, 2007 at 4:14 pm

Hmmm, Corylus (14), d'you know, I never thought of that...




Veritably, god is grott, merdeiful.

114. The Atheists Interviews

Comment #69484 by Flagellant on September 11, 2007 at 12:45 pm

The solution is: 'Think long term.' You won't get people to dump their religious baggage easily. And there are ways in which you may unwittingly – and I'm being very general for the moment - make it harder for them to do so. This is where we have to think strategically. We have to remember that changing your mind can be a complex process and that there are ways to help and ways to hinder. A clever, cutting remark may make you feel good, but it will, in all probability, push an antagonist further into their (reactional) delusion. And that's before we consider the effect on the truly open-minded kibitzer…

Evolutionarymiddleman is spot on with the perception that he '… would postulate that people hear and digest many arguments, sometimes over years or even decades, and one day realize that they don't believe in god.' So, please have a care what you say – it may be completely counterproductive now. And good luck with the project, e m m.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

[Edited for spelling.]

115. Honest Mistakes or Willful Mendacity

Comment #68223 by Flagellant on September 6, 2007 at 12:20 pm

One must presume that Cornwell is a scientist. He is, after all, 'Director of the Science and Human Dimension Project at Jesus College, Cambridge'. This makes him more likely to be a terminological inexactitudinarian than a poor misguided boy... Unless, of course, words have different meanings at The Other Place.




Positively and undeniably: god is grott, merdeiful.

116. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #68121 by Flagellant on September 6, 2007 at 7:40 am

Did I say anything about paying for it?





Indubitably, god is grott, merdeiful.

117. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #68115 by Flagellant on September 6, 2007 at 7:12 am

I'm not a great one for tenors, I'm afraid. My (current) avatar is of my friendly, local fishmonger. I can't think how you got any other impression… Yes, I like Emma Kirkby, Elly Ameling and voices of that sort. For mezzos, I'd choose the late Lorraine Hunt Lieberson. Amazingly, Anna Netrebko is apparently singing at the Last Night of the Proms, this Saturday.

For oddity collectors, here's Pavarotti and Sheryl Crow singing at a charity concert: http://www.mp3sale.ru/track.php?ms_trackid=250844 It's only a tiny sound clip but it's a memorable oddity.

Re the interview, I've listened again and I think RD deals pretty well with the shit (sic) thrown. When faced with the moderate/extremist question, I think RD might find a new way to handle it. (Asktheatheists has got a bit on moderates v. extremists.) There are also problems dealing with the virus/meme confusion because the rebuttal takes far longer than the question. I'm not sure what the uncommitted would make of the interview. I'll have a look for the new thread, as Northern Bright 225 #68110 suggests.

I'll just have to redouble my efforts to find a copy of Cornwell's book, won't I? If it's anything like his Grauniad article, http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2158503,00.html there may not be sufficient time for study between the acquisition and 'Koran in Crapper' treatment.



God is grott, merdeiful.

118. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #68098 by Flagellant on September 6, 2007 at 6:00 am

Yes, epeeist, I heard the discussion twixt RD and Cornwell. It wasn't really long enough to get anywhere. I'll listen to it again to see if I get anything else from it.

By the way, besides redoing my avatar at your prompting, I went into Blackwells yesterday to see if I could 'get' anything from Cornwell's book. I'm pleased to say (I think) that they don't have it in stock, yet. I also made some suggestions about where it should be shelved, if ever they did get it, aided of course, by Salley Vickers' first two sentences...



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

119. Interview with BHA President Polly Toynbee

Comment #68095 by Flagellant on September 6, 2007 at 5:46 am

This is Polly Toynbee's sentence that follows the bit that Dunc-uk (10) quotes:

There are ritual baths, churching, shaving heads, denying abortion and contraception, arranged marriage, purdah, barring unclean women access to the altar, let alone the priesthood, letting men divorce but not women - all this perverted abhorrence of half the human race lies at the maggotty heart of religion, the defining creed in all the holy of holies.

The whole (2001) piece – Behind the Burka – is worth reading, too: http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,559536,00.html

"Maggotty heart of religion," eh? Can you imagine RD writing that? It looks as though Polly will be a welcome and outspoken voice of reason. She's often on the TV, radio, and in print. Whatever she's on about, she comes across very well.



Veritably, God is grott, merdeiful.

120. India to charge writer Nasreen with 'hurting Muslim feelings'

Comment #67669 by Flagellant on September 4, 2007 at 9:38 am

With respect to my Comment 32, Peacebeuponme (36) - I'm pretty sure that notsobad's photo/avatar is genuine; I seem to recollect that this was one of the photos taken at a London demonstration against the Danish cartoons. Four of the demonstrators have been imprisoned for their parts in the demo. If I remember correctly, the sentences were for incitement to murder and were for three or four years. Here's the link to the story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2129235,00.html .





Veritably, God is grott, merdeiful.
[Minor edit for clarity, link added.]

121. India to charge writer Nasreen with 'hurting Muslim feelings'

Comment #67607 by Flagellant on September 4, 2007 at 2:07 am

notsobad has a great avatar on this thread:(http://richarddawkins.net/article,1599,The-God-Delusion-One-Year-Countdown,RichardDawkinsnet , comment 5). Very relevant!




Truly, God is grott, merdeiful.

122. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #67109 by Flagellant on September 2, 2007 at 1:50 am

Dr 'CIA' Benway (112, #67016) has cracked it. I had a quick look at Salley Vickers's website and followed a few links. She's clearly no idiot, yet the review, while being overtly lavish in its praise, is so full of obvious howlers that one has to smell a rat. Indeed, as our CIA lurker points out, it says, in the review's first sentence

THIS BOOK IS A PIECE OF Sheer Heaven. IT...

Coded message? Of course it is.

If we look at Cornwell's 'Guardian' article, featured here with comments, a few days ago, (http://richarddawkins.net/article,1584,The-importance-of-doubt,John-Cornwell-Guardian), one might infer that Vickers is purblind to Cornwell's inadequate, as well as nasty, thesis. Alternatively, she has stitched him up rather nicely. One day, someone will write a half-way decent attempt at refuting Dawkins. Cornwell certainly hasn't done it, as Ms Vickers so subtly and ironically points out.

I wonder if I could also refer you to my comment 50 #66925:

There are so many ways the bloody Brits 'do' irony. Beware!

Just a coincidence, of course...



Truly, god is grott, merdeiful.

[Edit: Dr Benway's 'solution' edited in for clarity.]

123. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66946 by Flagellant on September 1, 2007 at 4:39 am

If Cornwell's book Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion is really as '…deliciously wise, witty and intellectually sharp…' as his article in 'The Guardian', (
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1584,The-importance-of-doubt,John-Cornwell-Guardian), then this opinion must inevitably be seen as unwitting irony of the very highest order.



God is grott, merdeiful.

124. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66942 by Flagellant on September 1, 2007 at 4:12 am

Comment 59 #66935 by epeeist (and NMcC) - many thanks for your very perceptive question. Here is my considered reply:

Diana often made use of advice from psychics and healers. In the weeks before her death, the Princess and Dodi Al Fayed visited Rita Rogers, a famous psychic. There is no evidence that this brilliant psychic warned her of important things like wearing a seat-belt - perhaps she thought it too obvious - nor that she issued a warning about Paris and tunnels. I couldn't stop musing about this as I returned from the thanksgiving service yesterday...

As for the irony, it's about as ironic as my name.

I read something really interesting, though, in Marina Warner's excellent book Alone of all her sex - the myth and the cult of the Virgin Mary. Ms Warner has no doubt that, in due course, Mary will be declared a Goddess. I wonder where that will leave the Trinity. On the positive side, I have just begun to appreciate that making a woman a cult figure serves to counterbalance the misogyny of male-oriented dogma.



And, from my position as deceased consort to the 'Defender of the Faiths', I can only say: God is grott, merdeiful!

125. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66925 by Flagellant on September 1, 2007 at 2:32 am

There are so many ways the bloody Brits 'do' irony. Beware!




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

126. Review of Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Response to the God Delusion

Comment #66918 by Flagellant on September 1, 2007 at 2:02 am

The argument that you have to be an expert in theology to be able to comment authoritatively on it is best dealt with by analogy:

Do you have to be a pederast to comment on paedophilia?



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

127. The importance of doubt

Comment #66427 by Flagellant on August 30, 2007 at 1:41 am

There are other calumnies and misrepresentations in Cornwell's piece, besides that mentioned by RD (comment 2). For example, Hitler didn't bump people off exclusively for their religious beliefs; he also wanted to eliminate homosexuals, gypsies and those less than perfectly Aryan. He was far more obsessed with racial purity than belief.

But the insistance that "…Dawkins is inviting fundamentalists to be even more fundamentalist" is ridiculous and offensive. The implication of this is: if we don't oppose fundamentalism vigorously, it won't get any worse. Well, the UK tried that in 1989 over Salman Rushdie and look where that got us! Only now are we beginning to take a more robust approach, e.g. by prosecuting those who incite murder in the name of their religion.

Finally, there are many things that would seem to give the lie to Cornwell's ridiculous misrepresentation of Dawkins's message as: "…if you go to church, synagogue, mosque or temple only once a year, you are just as liable to perpetrate fanatical deeds on the basis of faith as an al-Qaida terrorist." Examples are the 'Atheists for Jesus' movement (http://richarddawkins.net/article,20,Atheists-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins) and RD's relationship, and fellow-feeling with Richard Harries, former Bishop of Oxford.

It's interesting that Cornwell 'returned queasily to Christianity'. Hmmm…




Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.

128. Another view

Comment #66212 by Flagellant on August 29, 2007 at 10:55 am

This article isn't very funny and it doesn't do much, does it? I mean, if one is trying to be funny about Dawkins, one can do much much better. For example, here is an article from today's 'Private Eye', a British satirical magazine:

THE ENEMIES OF REASON

(Silly music. Elderly donnish figure wearing casual clothes and expression of deep concern gazes earnestly into camera)

Professor Richard Dawkins (for it is he) : It is frightening to think that in the 21st century there are millions of people all over the world who believe that they can change the future by a simple act involving a birthday cake.

(Cut to shot of family group clustered around Marks & Spencer chocolate cake covered in lit candles. Woman blows out candles while the rest of her family shout "Go on, Mum - make a wish!" Close-up of woman with eyes closed, accompanied by sinister music. Cut to Dawkins, looking shocked and incredulous.)

Dawkins (interviewing woman) : Mrs Simpkins, can I ask you what you think you were doing just now?

Mrs Simpkins: Well, I just made a wish while I was blowing out the candles, like I always do.

Dawkins: And you really thought that what you were wishing for would in some mysterious way come true?

Mrs Simpkins: Well, you never know, do you?

Dawkins: But how could blowing out candles on a cake have any influence over a future event? Isn't that just the most crude, primitive, infantile, unscientific superstition?

Mrs Simpkins: Well, if you're going to be like that, you're not going to have any of my cake.

Dawkins: As a control test, tell me what it is you wished for?

Family: Don't tell him, Mum, or it won't come true.

Dawkins (to camera) : So obviously the followers of this cult are under a vow of silence not to divulge the object of the "wish", to prevent any analysis of the outcome of their pathetic ritual, thus exposing it as an empty and futile act of self-deception for insecure neurotics.

(Cut to men in white coats looking through microscopes at pieces of birthday cake)

Dawkins: For the last five years, a team of researchers from the University of New Dworkins has been analysing over 2,000 case histories of the Birthday Wish cult. The leader of the team, Professor Hiram Moonbat, gave me his findings.

Bearded Scientist: In examining 2,522 samples, we could find little or no correlation between the expression of the "wish" by the anniversarial celebrant and any ultimate wished-for event.

Dawkins: Well, that proves it, doesn't it? The whole thing is rubbish, isn't it? And it is deeply alarming that, in the 21st century, the dark forces of unreason should still have so many millions of people in their grip, still indulging in...

Professor Moonbat (in background): ... however, our researchers were somewhat hampered by the fact that no one would tell us what they had wished for, which rather invalidated...

Dawkins (intervening): So there we have it, Everyone in the world is mad except me, and very, very dangerous.

(Cut to shot of birthday cake exploding, destroying family home. Caption reads "Reconstruction ")

NEXT WEEK: Professor Dawkins looks at the bizarre practice of shooting fish in a barrel, concluding that it is deeply unscientific and boring to watch.

Now that's what I call both pointed and amusing. I hope that RD will be as amused, too.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

129. Richard Dawkins at the Edinburgh Book Festival

Comment #65842 by Flagellant on August 27, 2007 at 4:00 am

Right on hungarianelephant (22) #65834! Of course we should have published at least one of the Danish cartoons:

Figure at the gates of paradise saying to large numbers of approaching dead suicide bombers: 'Stop! We've run out of virgins!'

It's very funny and makes a serious political point. We have been appeasing the nutters ever since the fatwah on Salman Rushdie.

I was working in W. 23rd St, New York in 1989 when the original Satanic Verses furore began, just a few doors away from Viking Penguin, Rushdie's US publisher. The police were doing a good job of keeping the demonstrators under control, so I had no hesitation in going out to harangue the mob about the nastiness of Khomeini's fatwa and Mohammedanism's ridiculous 'sensitivities'. I told them to grow up. I was livid. But a group of US writers, Norman Mailer among them, went further: they held public readings of The Satanic Verses in a Manhattan hall. I was unable to get in, such was the demand.

The general attitude in the US was one of robust confrontation. And what was the reaction in the UK? Virtually blaming Rushdie for the whole business and hoping that it would just go away. John le Carré, by comparison with Mailer et al, was pathetic. I have wondered why the UK authorities were so craven, ever since. What they did was create an environment in which Mohammedan extremism could flourish. To confront it now is far more difficult than it would have been in 1989.

I am often critical of the US tendency to be 'in your face', but I have to say that they got it right, then. They now seem to have a lesser problem with home-grown Islamism than we do in Europe, with our 'more diplomatic' approach. Subsequently, Iqbal Sacranie, one of Rushdie's principal persecutors, got a knighthood! The shit should have been imprisoned.

For too long, governments have listened to those who would have Mohammedanism dictate what we should and should not do in this country. I do hope we've learnt the lesson about encouraging this dark-age relic; it should be robustly confronted. The knighting of Salman Rushdie may be one indication that we have at last realised that a more robust stance is warranted but we've had it wrong for nearly twenty years.

There are two similarities between the Satanic Verses and the Danish cartoons. The 'blasphemous' nature of Rushdie's book was highly debatable but it was seized upon by Khomeini as a political focus; the Danish cartoons were exaggerated by the inclusion with them of two very crude and unfunny drawings, that never appeared in print. They were obviously included as a rabble-rousing device.

We create problems for ourselves when we let allow religiosi of any sort to lie, explicitly or implicitly, about any aspect of our society. We compound the problem by appeasing the liars; it only emboldens them and it makes it far more difficult when we ultimately decide to react. If we had reacted properly in the UK when there were 'kill Rushdie' threats in the UK, we wouldn't need to be having this debate about the Danish cartoons.

And, right back on thread, besides the full hour's chat between RD and Muriel Gray at Edinburgh, there's also an interesting talk by A.C. Grayling. http://www.edbookfest.co.uk/readings/index.html#l




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

130. Only secular schools will overcome sectarianism

Comment #65744 by Flagellant on August 26, 2007 at 8:55 am

Further to my post #6, it is instructive to note the following e-petition results:

1. Against road pricing: over 1.7 million
2. One in favour of faith schools: 18684
3. One petition against faith schools: 3191

We do have a problem, don't we? There are umpteen different anti-faith schools petitions so the message is getting a bit diluted.

Incidentally, many of the e-petitions are no longer accepting 'signatures' but there are still some live ones.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.
[Major edit for accuracy - sorry.]

131. Only secular schools will overcome sectarianism

Comment #65724 by Flagellant on August 26, 2007 at 3:43 am

I signed the 'Scrap faith schools' petition earlier this year. I received a reply referring me to this statement:

The Government remains committed to a diverse range of schools for parents to choose from, including schools with a religious character or "faith schools" as they are commonly known.

Religious Education (RE) in all schools, including faith schools, is aimed at developing pupils' knowledge, understanding and awareness of the major religions represented in the country. It encourages respect for those holding different beliefs and helps promote pupils' moral, cultural and mental development. In partnership with national faith and belief organisations we have introduced a national framework for RE. In February 2006, the faith communities affirmed their support for the framework in a joint statement making it clear that all children should be given the opportunity to receive inclusive RE, and that they are committed to making sure the framework is used in the development of RE in all their schools and colleges.

The Churches have a long history of providing education in this country and have confirmed their commitment to community cohesion. Faith schools have an excellent record in providing high-quality education and serving disadvantaged communities and are some of the most ethnically and socially diverse in the country. Many parents who are not members of a particular faith value the structured environment provided by schools with a religious character.

Two comments:
1. I fear that new petitioners will receive the same ghastly answer and
2. Short-sighted, weaselly government bastards! Bastards! Bastards!




Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.

132. Islamic Finance and Its Critics

Comment #64256 by Flagellant on August 19, 2007 at 3:16 am

Corylus (3) - Islamic art is very fine, unlike other bits of Mohammedanism, I was pleasantly surprised to find. It's quite often associated with architecture and is often manifest in complex patterns. For example, the Islamic bits of the cathedral at Cordoba knock the Xtian stuff into a cocked hat. Have a look at "Islamic Art" on/in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_art

Dunno about explicitly Saudi stuff, though. But isn't it nice to know that even the nastiest religion has some redeeming features?



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private

133. Good luck, Dawkins!

Comment #63807 by Flagellant on August 16, 2007 at 1:11 am

Is it too much to hope that we will, after all, see RD's 'medium' who purported to put Richard in touch with his father? (For those who don't know, Richard's father is still alive.) Apparently, this clip will not be shown 'for legal reasons'.

I just don't get it. Did the Channel Four lawyer make the decision? There is no sensible legal reason for withholding this. One of the objectives of 'junk-busting' programmes like The Enemies of Reason must surely be to induce a purveyor of nonsense to sue. It would be a win-win situation for reason if a case ever came to court. My guess would be that no 'medium' would ever dare to risk it.

So please, RD & Channel Four, get it out there.




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

134. Christopher Hitchens and David Allen White discuss the impact of Christianity on Western Civilization

Comment #63132 by Flagellant on August 13, 2007 at 7:44 am

In art and music, there's a lot to be said for being aware of the influence of the sponsor/patron with the money. That was usually the church; then it became the aristocracy.

I'm just listening to something modern: Shostakovitch. Even he had 'patronage' problems...



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

135. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #63126 by Flagellant on August 13, 2007 at 7:19 am

We'll have to take it on trust that Quetz can do these things. You see, it's all a matter of faith and belief.

(PS Quetz, does this pardon my sin of occsionally being an unbelieving, schismatic backslider?)

136. The Out Campaign

Comment #63083 by Flagellant on August 13, 2007 at 4:39 am

re 714. comment #63062 by epeeist

Perhaps the Taleban aren't beyond learning from the Enlightenment, after all.

I can't find the quote but there was a proclamation by the Taleban the other day to the effect that "victory will be ours when we close the last school and behead the last person who taught there."

Diderot, one of the most prominent Enlightement thinkers, is reputed to have said: 'Let us strangle the last king with the guts of the last priest.'

Still, I guess the Taleban neither do nor understand irony.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

137. Amnesty to defy Catholic church over rape victims' abortion rights

Comment #63044 by Flagellant on August 13, 2007 at 2:37 am

I have just made a donation to Amnesty International. The shame of it was that there was no place to explain my action properly. Otherwise, I'd have included a very explicit and pithy statement about The Vatican.

All religions are silly but some are nasty. This is indubitably nastiness in action.




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

138. Another Flea is Born

Comment #62512 by Flagellant on August 10, 2007 at 2:34 am

I don't think it's much like Huxley, either. I'd looked at that picture before posting.




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

139. Another Flea is Born

Comment #62506 by Flagellant on August 10, 2007 at 2:11 am

Perhaps it is meant to be Russell but the bloke between Darwin and Marx still looks far more like Brian Sewell than anyone else I can think of; I've looked at several more pictures of Sewell and the resemblance is quite striking. Getting pictures wrong isn't unknown in publicity/marketing departments...



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

140. Another Flea is Born

Comment #62477 by Flagellant on August 9, 2007 at 11:09 pm

Hi toddaa, re comment 9, #62429: unless he has a twin brother, the bloke between Darwin and Marx is Brian Sewell, the very droll British art critic. I understand that he's a Roman Catholic though, poor chap. Look at his adulation website and see what I mean about close resemblance: http://www.brian-sewell.co.uk/brian-sewell-home.html

Have the Return of the Village Atheist publishers scored an own goal?




Religion - an activity between consenting adults in private.
[Edited for minor point of accuracy.]

141. The new preface to The God Delusion paperback and Q&A

Comment #62252 by Flagellant on August 9, 2007 at 5:51 am

I'm with Donald (106) on whether the word should be 'God' or 'god'. Elegantly put, if I may say so, sir; I thank you for saving me an inelegant rant.

The cheek of people wanting respect for their god(s) is irritating. It automatically presumes that we know exactly which god the believers have in mind, without a careful definition. This is not a trivial matter, Ash: tell us, first of all, which of the many gods going are you talking about before you start arguing with us.



Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.

142. New age therapies cause 'retreat from reason'

Comment #62232 by Flagellant on August 9, 2007 at 2:21 am

Camille Paglia is, of course, a celebrity atheist who believes in astrology. Shome mishtake, shurely?




Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

143. New age therapies cause 'retreat from reason'

Comment #62226 by Flagellant on August 9, 2007 at 1:48 am

Shuggy (157), Geraint (158), and Veronique (159) - You might be interested in an earlier part of the conversation with this brilliant astrologer. She asked me for my birth sign. I said 'hippogryph' and when she asked for a more meaningful answer, I said 'OK, you tell me.' She asked me lots of questions and I gave truthful answers, after which she made a series of guesses assertions. Many years later, I blogged about the experience. This is part of what I wrote:

This went on for some time and I was beginning to find it difficult to hide my disappointment. Eventually, she got it right on the seventh go. What a triumph, at last. This shows all the doubting Thomases what a skilled activity astrology is. People mock it at their peril.

Interestingly, I only blogged about it as a link to what I read in one of Barry Humphries's series of biographies: My life as me:

When a woman asks me my star sign, however attractive she might be, I experience an instant desire to bolt. Likewise the apologists for reincarnation...

As far as I'm concerned, that's the end for me, too. For example, Camille Paglia mentions her birth sign in interviews. She also says she wants to be taken seriously… Gott verdomme!

144. The Out Campaign

Comment #61887 by Flagellant on August 7, 2007 at 9:49 am

Russell (660): it's lovely and warm in the UK at the moment...

Veronique (653): the character in Spinal Tap refers to D minor as 'The saddest of all keys.' This makes me laugh whenever I hear it. It's too complicated to explain why. If you feel like trying some other D minor works, how about Mozart's D minor Piano concerto, (#20) K466 and his exquisite Requiem, K 626? Then there's Bach first keyboard concerto... Isn't it sad that the ACO no longer plays at Mudgee?

(Oops, this is a bit too far off topic. Tut tut!)



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

145. The Out Campaign

Comment #61399 by Flagellant on August 5, 2007 at 3:23 am

Well bugger me sideways... that's too clever by half. Brilliant! And I thought I was declaring a Quetz miracle and stopping a schism. Please pardon thou, my unbelief.

Let's go back to the Aramaic, not this modern French deviancy: as Ivor Cutler said, 'Gruts.'


Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

146. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #61391 by Flagellant on August 5, 2007 at 2:58 am

Wikipedia: His father, Clinton John Dawkins, was a farmer and former wartime soldier...

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins )



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

147. The Out Campaign

Comment #61386 by Flagellant on August 5, 2007 at 2:25 am

Hi Quetz, your worshipfulness; since you understand (nearly) everything, then you should read the gospels to find out that it was really steve99 who tried to stir it up with respect to e acutes. I merely suggested that we should consider worshipping Ivor Cutler (Peace be upon him), too, as well as drinking his nominated tea.

A fine god you are if you accuse me of the wrong heresies... No offence, of course ... (hurriedly hedging bets.)


Judas

Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private

148. The Out Campaign

Comment #61382 by Flagellant on August 5, 2007 at 2:11 am

Veronique You should really thank Henri for being such a knowlegeable, as well as a rather rude, philosopher. This is Spinal Tap repays several watchings - there are so many subtle, and not so subtle, allusions.



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

149. New age therapies cause 'retreat from reason'

Comment #61379 by Flagellant on August 5, 2007 at 2:03 am

I get pissed off by nonsense, too. I once asked an astrologer to tell me my 'birth sign'. She got it on the seventh go.

And didn't Diana consult a 'seer', not long before going to Paris?

How is it that such 'seers' aren't always winning Lotteries?

RD has suggested elsewhere that many of these charlatans should be prosecuted under the Trade Descriptions Act. A few prominent prosecutions might do wonders for the nation's approach to reason.



Religion – an activity for consenting adults in private.

150. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #61371 by Flagellant on August 5, 2007 at 1:25 am

Good piece, Peter Millar. I can't wait for 13th August.

Wrt to getting the programme to Oz, it'll get there one day, I guess. Mind you, we in the UK could always record it and... (oops - copyright cops might be reading).



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.
(This just shows that RD picks up stuff from the threads on his own site as well as admonishing people for posting inappropriately &/or on the wrong thread. Lol)

[Edited for spelling]