All in all, he presents a grotesque image of religion and he doesn't seem to be completely off the mark and that scares me. — TheMadFool
Even in totalitarian societies that weren't built on a religious foundation, like Communist Russia and Nazi Germany, the mechanics of those societies are very much religious in nature. — Christoffer
For anyone who dives into the mechanics of religion, both in society and in terms of human psychology will agree with most of what he says. The last stand of religion against rational ideas is that it holds people under moral guidance that atheism doesn't have, which is only a true statement for apologists, not atheists. I seem to remember a study that showed that the number of crimes in more atheistic communities is less than in religious ones. — Christoffer
Christopher Hitchens. — TheMadFool
Sure, Communism sought to destroy religion and commit genocide on an unimaginable scale, because it was religious in nature. Is the sort of absurd position people advocate — Inis
You mention irrationality. If you know anything about the history of science, you will know that the big-bang was discovered by a Catholic priest, and that the entire atheist theoretical physics community sought to deny it. Let's not forget that Newton was deeply religious and according to the French, Lamarck discovered evolution, and was religious — Inis
So, what do you think?
Religion poisons everything?! — TheMadFool
Are you saying that the mechanics of making Lenin and Stalin into deity-like figures, following hard doctrines and mantras to make enemies of those who think differently from the regime, isn’t religious in its mechanics? — Christoffer
Religious mechanics aren’t confined to faith in the supernatural, the mechanics are the mechanics of manipulation and humans ability to stick to answers when in positions of having no other answers. — Christoffer
Yes, and the theory of evolution and religion have lived happily ever after since then... :smirk:Let's not forget that Newton was deeply religious and according to the French, Lamarck discovered evolution, and was religious. — Inis
Are you saying that the mechanics of making Lenin and Stalin into deity-like figures, following hard doctrines and mantras to make enemies of those who think differently from the regime, isn’t religious in its mechanics? — Christoffer
Yes, and the theory of evolution and religion have lived happily ever after since then... — Arkady
Having said that, I do think that the relationship between science (and reason generally) and religion may be a bit more nuanced than Hitchens proposes. While I enjoyed his work (including God is Not Great), such sweeping statements as "religion poisons everything," are IMO hyperbolic — Arkady
Even if this somewhat sanitized picture of the relationship between Catholicism and evolution is true, it does not tell the whole story. For one thing, even just restricting our view to Christianity alone, evangelical Christians and their Protestant cohorts generally are much less hospitable towards evolution than are Catholics.Well, both the Church of England and the Catholic Church have declared evolution and big-bang to be compatible with their beliefs.
Also it is instructive to note that according to Catholic doctrine, faith is unnecessary. The truth may be achieved through reason. — Inis
I don't impugn your posts for their omission of Galileo. Not every discussion of science and religion must mention him.But of course, I am conveniently ignoring the persecution of Galileo, as atheists must ignore the many cases of corrupt atheist science.
Also it is instructive to note that according to Catholic doctrine, faith is unnecessary. The truth may be achieved through reason. — Inis
Why does that scare you? — Christoffer
That is also pure opinion and very bad philosophy by the way. — Rank Amateur
Schools, hospitals, homes for the aged and infirm, foundling homes, orphanages, shelters for the poor, alms houses, medical missions, charitable aid societies, plenty of beautiful art and architecture. So no, not everything. — AJJ
Could these be done to serve a vile purpose? To become centers of religious indoctrination and produce an army of fanatics? — TheMadFool
So, what do you think? — TheMadFool
Is to philosophical discussions of theism, what Donald trump is to productive discussions on governance. Both are entertainers and salesmen. — Rank Amateur
Reason is in fact the path to faith, and faith takes over when reason can say no more. — Rank Amateur
You should finish the book first, as many of your and other peoples issues are addressed by the end.
It is not meant as hyperbole, he makes the case that religion poisons everything it touches, that even any good works it does is tainted and if the poison (religion) is removed we would be better off — DingoJones
If that’s your line then what you have there is a conspiracy theory, where everything that opposes the view that the religion in question is malign is taken as an attempt at trickery, that therefore supports the theory. It’s entirely circular.
No one seriously denies the failings of the various churches, but it doesn’t follow that the religion they espouse can be described as poison. — AJJ
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.