Atheism Explored

2) Atheism is responsible for the greatest crimes in human history.

People of faith often claim that the crimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the inevitable product of unbelief. The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.

The last sentence is right (partially because religion is reasonable); everything else is wrong. These great evils were products of unbelief, and the reason their religion-like personality cults took hold was that they made an enemy out of true religion first. The supremacy of the State replaced the morals of God.




Then explain to me the inqusitions. These were not listed, yet these killed Millions of people. These were not crimes carried out by unbelievers...they were crimes committed by the church, ordered by Bishops and Deacons. The Spanish Inqusition, The Witch's Hammer...explain how atheists are responsible for those?

First, take a look at this article for some very interesting revelations about the Inquisition:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODAyNDViYmIwYzRhNTkxNzA1NGZmYjVmODJiMWJlZjY=

Whatever the truth about the Inquisition is, it's irrelevant to the point: what atheism IS responsible for. The horrors of Nazism & Communism were unleashed by extinguishing the Judeo-Christian belief in the sanctity & immeasurable worth of every human life.

Another viewpoint...


http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-70387/Spain

You did not answer about the Witches Hammer...The book used during 200 years of Witch trials. Certainly Religion played a role in that

I didn't address the witch trials because they're still irrelevant to the article. To say "Atheism is responsible for bad things A, B, and C" does not do anything to suggest that religion has never been used for bad things. Everyone acknowledges that, at points in history, religious people have been guilty of bad things. But the point is, the Judeo-Christian tradition is unique in that it laid the foundation for human rights and for tempering man's darker impulses.

I don't have time now, but I'll reply when I do. As usual, fully blinded by his ideology, Cal has proven complete misunderstanding of words like morality, truth, faith, and atheist/agnostic. He has done very little to rebuke any of the points Harris has made.

What did I tell you about polluting my blog?

"Agnosticism...is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly theological claims regarding metaphysics, afterlife or the existence of God, god(s), or deities—is unknown or (possibly) inherently unknowable."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic

ME: Uncertainty is closer to agnosticism than atheism. Some "complete misunderstanding!"

Coincidentially, Jayce's conduct in most of our past debates proves my point about morality...

"Coincidentially, Jayce's conduct in most of our past debates proves my point about morality..."

You're an idiot. What do you have to back that up? That I said you didn't even try to learn anything about evolution? I stand by that given 1) I think you're mentally capable of learning about it, and 2) you don't have even a basic understanding of it. You also said you haven't read anything that disproves Coulter. That pretty much means you haven't even tried to learn anything about it.

I'm guessing that you wish I'd leave. You're in over your head in these evolution/atheism arguments, I'm making you look bad, and you know it.

Regarding agnostic/atheist, your definition is a good one. By following that definition you can be both agnostic and atheist.

Strictly speaking, there are two forms of atheism: strong atheism and weak atheism. The former is a belief that there are no gods. The latter is a lack of a belief in god/gods. I'll argue from the weak perspective since I hold those beliefs.

I can't be certain you have a purple teletubby on your bed. I can't prove that you do or don't, and I doubt I'll ever know for sure. I am therefore agnostic as to whether or not you have a purple teletubby on your bed.

I don't think that you do, and, in fact, I am very confident that it isn't true. I do not hold the belief that you have a purple teletubby on your bed, which would make me an "atheist" about your purple teletubby.

See, your claim that a lack of knowledge about our universe somehow makes people agnostic is foolish... just as foolish as many more of your takes in that blog entry. I'll respond when I have time.

As promised - http://jaycec.blogspot.com/2007/02/coulter-nation-makes-me-laugh.html

Too many things wrong with this blog entry to fit into a comment box.