A great feature of the scientific endeavour is that our ideas, hypotheses and theories are usually tested against reality. In fact we get very worried when we can’t do this. Consequently there has been some philosophical discussion and concern around speculative ideas or hypotheses like string theory (really hypotheses not theories) and the multiple universe ideas.
But, in some areas of philosophy and theology reality can safely be ignored. And here all sorts of weird and wonderful preconceived ideas can get justified using a logic which basically boils down to mental gymnastics. I have always found debate with post modernists and theologians is a bit like jelly wrestling. Without reality to fall back on anything goes.
The philosopher of science Daniel Dennett gave an interesting talk, “The evolution of Confusion,” on theological justification at the Atheist Alliance International convention last month. Its based on his new project interviewing clergyman who secretly don’t believe anymore. Atheist clergymen are probably far more common than we might think. And all clergymen have problems in their profession which require theological arguments to resolve, or at least to patch up for the moment. This leads to a weird style of logic and argument – hence my feeling of jelly wrestling.
This is a fascinating talk. I understand the research will be published soon. Hopefully it will also be available in a popular format like a book.
Dan Dennett is the author of many excellent books, including “Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon” and “Darwin’s Dangerous Idea“. He is also featured in the video “The Four Horsemen” along with Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.
‘The Evolution of Confusion’ by Dan Dennett, AAI 2009.
From RichardDawkins.net: ‘Dan Dennett talks about purposely-confusing theology and how it’s used. He also describes his new project interviewing clergyman who secretly don’t believe anymore, and introduces a new term: “Deepity.”‘
Posted in agnostic, agnosticism, atheism, belief, Bible, culture, Dawkins, Dennett, diversity, faith, god, Harris, philosophy, religion, supernatural, superstition, theology
Tagged Atheist Alliance International, Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, philosophy, Philosophy of Science, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, theology
Book Review: The New Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason by Victor Stenger
Paperback: 282 pages
Publisher: Prometheus Books (September 22, 2009)
This book is timely. The “New Atheism” hit our awareness in the mid-part of the decade when Sam Harris’s book “The End of Faith” became a best-seller. This was quickly followed by more best-sellers from the authors Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Victor Stenger (the author of this book). And then there was the response. Many books have been written, mostly be theists, attacking the “New Atheists.” Although none of the later was a best-seller they did suggest that a new stage in the religion-atheism debate was underway.
Stenger’s new book is also useful because it helps put this whole debate in context. He summarises that nature of the “New Atheism movement” (although it is hardly a movement as there was no coordination in publishing these books). He briefly summarises the arguments of the “New Atheism” and the arguments employed by those attacking “New Atheism.” Then he shows the fallacies in the arguments employed by the “New Christians.” In some cases he reveals the way many of the “New Atheist” positions have been distorted and misrepresented. In others he deals with the substance of these arguments – particularly those dealing with scientific issues.
As an Emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Hawaii and Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado Stenger is an ideal person to write on this subject
Posted in agnostic, agnosticism, atheism, belief, Bible, book review, creationism, Darwin, Dawkins, Dennett, evolution, faith, god, Hitchens, intelligent design, religion, Science and Society, supernatural, superstition
Tagged atheism, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, End of Faith, religion, Religion and Spirituality, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris
Or do I mean irreligion in the public square? Same thing really.
I refer to the open discussion of religious ideas in the “public square.” That means ideas can be put up for consideration and subjected to open support or criticism. The same as our ideas on politics and sport. I am using the dictionary, not literal, definition of “public square” as “relating to or concerning the people at large or all members of a community.”
Don’t we already do that? Yes, I agree. But some people are unhappy about it. There is an idea around that religion doesn’t get a fair go. That it should be able to promote its claims and ideas without being subjected to criticism. The United Nations has passed a resolution against the “defamation of religion”. Ireland has reintroduced a blasphemy law. You get the picture.
Posted in agnostic, agnosticism, atheism, belief, culture, diversity, faith, human rights, New Zealand, religion
Tagged Anglicanism, Daniel Dennett, Francis Collins, Ireland, Islam, Ken Miller, Lawrence Krauss, Michael Ruse, Michael Shermer, National Statement on Religious Diversity, New Zealand, religion, Religion and Spirituality, Religious belief, Richard Dawkins, United Nations