Re: [asa] Dawkins, religion, and children

From: Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue May 01 2007 - 09:36:29 EDT

At 09:28 AM 5/1/2007, you wrote:
>still nothing. How do you manage it... to send so many characters
>and words and yet fail to communicate? ~ Pim

@ "... For example, this is why atheists are not only wrong about
God, but not even wrong, for it cannot be ungnosised that their
coarse language is inadequate to the lofty subject it can never
reach. Truly, they are like the tone deaf person who dismisses
musical beauty just because they can neither hear nor express it.

Put another way, if one truly understands and appreciates the
capability of language to store and convey immaterial spiritual
qualities, this poses an insurmountable obstacle to atheism, if only
because there is no materialistic/Darwinian theory that will ever
account for this mysterious property of language. The moment a
Darwinian struggles to express his ideas in an elegant and
aesthetically satisfying way, he is no longer a Darwinian. To the
extent that he believes that truth is what one is ethically bound to
believe -- just as good is what one is obligated to do -- he is no atheist.

Let us stipulate what is not a tautology -- that Truth is truth, and
that it is mankind's unending task to make the one conform to the
other. Whenever anyone -- even an atheist -- says anything, he is
presupposing a universe in which a thing called "truth" may be
encoded and passed from mind to mind through a medium called
language. These are huge presuppositions, and only serve to
re-emphasize the crudity of the atheist mind. Unless an atheist is an
abject nihilist, then he doesn't have the courage of his absence of
convictions.

For example ..." http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/search?q=failure+to+communicate

~ Janice

>On 5/1/07, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> At 08:35 AM 5/1/2007, PvM wrote:
>>
>>Haha very funny Janice. Of course, nothing much to support the existence of
>>or our ability to recognize absolute truths. Happy May Day. ~ Pim
>> @ "...But if truth is relative and perception is reality, then no one's
>>ideas about the world are any better than anyone else's. Fact is reduced to
>>opinion, and conformity to opinion is ultimately maintained by the group or
>>institution that has the power to enforce its version of reality.
>>Ironically, this achieves the opposite effect intended by its liberal
>>proponents. That is, if we cannot judge the merit of competing ideas by
>>assessing their value in light of an absolute standard, then either everyone
>>will have their own private truth, or truth will be enforced by the state or
>>some other powerful collectivity. On college campuses, no one is
>>unsophisticated enough to believe that truth exists; however, you'd better
>>not utter the wrong truth, or you will come face to face with the Fist that
>>enforces absolute horizontal relativism. ..."
>>
>> Those who are emotionally able to handle it, may read the rest of it here:
>>http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/search?q=recognizing+absolute+truth
>>
>> ~ Janice
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 5/1/07, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> At 01:05 PM 4/30/2007, PvM wrote:
>>
>>
>> Excellent point. Let me also point out that "But a democracy mediated by
>> mere animal-men will sooner or later lead to the Reign of the Beast. " is
>> contradicted by science showing how such communities arise and are
>> maintained. Religion historically may have been a way of mediating these
>> communities, but would it not be fascinating if religion evolved as a side
>> effect of community's and individual's survival? In fact, that many
>> cultures have found different expressions of their religious faith, seems
>>to
>> further show that the role of religion may be one of mediation more than
>> about 'absolute truths'. After all, how do we recognize absolute truths?
>>Not
>> that we have not tried, often with very limited success. ~ Pim
>> @ Some aren't emotionally (or spiritually) able to recognize absolute
>> truths yet. Here's a test you can take to find out if you're among those
>> who aren't able to:
>>
>> Dr. Sanity's moral Rorschach Test
>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2006/07/moral-difference.html
>>
>> ~ Janice ...."If one is going to engage in comparative religion, one
>>needs
>> to exit history and take a martian's-eye view of the situation. From that
>> much wider trans-historical viewpoint, the Judeo-Christian tradition
>>emerges
>> not as religion, but the cure for religion--including the religion of
>> atheism or "secularism." Allow me to explain..."
>> http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/search?q=pacifists
>>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue, 01 May 2007 09:36:29 -0400

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 01 2007 - 09:37:11 EDT