Re: [asa] Morality

From: Jack <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
Date: Tue Apr 29 2008 - 21:41:26 EDT

But that wasnt what the "thesis" of this thread is. The moral portion of
this thread started back in the "Expelled" thread, when David Campbell said
"Dawkins is one of the best arguments against atheism." And you asked why.
You got a series of answers that made various points, culminating in what
George says here:

"There's a very good article by John Haught in one of the February issues of
Christian Century that makes the same point about Dawkins and other recent
"soft atheists" (to use his language) in detail that David (Heddle) makes
here. His argument goes deeper, however, than just the superficial
character of the critique of the soft atheists. Haught compares Dawkins et
al. with hard atheists like Marx, Nietzsche and Freud. Haught arugues that
they (and especially Nietzsche) really tried to face the fact that with the
elimination of God there is also removed any basis for morality or claims
for lasting truth. They were willing to look into the abyss. Dawkins et
al. on the other hand seem to imagine that once the ideas of God &/or
transcendence have been done away with the human race can just go on to
practice good liberal virtues without any problems.

The soft atheists of coursel argue, with a good deal of truth, that
religious people in general aren't a lot more moral than atheists. But
there is no reason for athiests like Dawkins to follow any particular syatem
of morality or ethics. OTOH, religious people have a moral standard by
which they can be judged. The point is not that atheists are more immoral
than believers but that they are unwilling or afraid to face up to the
consequences of their position. "

That is the point Pim, and you keep missing it.

----- Original Message -----
From: "PvM" <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
To: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Morality

> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:13 AM, <drsyme@cablespeed.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "I am not saying that religion is the source of the world's trouble,"
>>
>> But Dawkins does, dont even try to deny it.
>
> I really do not care.
>
>> "And neither one is more or less privileged or right or wrong here."
>
>> Except that the atheists are blind to the source of their values and dont
>> even see it. And then they want to rid the world the manifestation of
>> this
>> source in the world.
>
> So you believe. However, this hardly suggests support for the thesis
> that somehow Christians are more privileged than atheists in defining
> what is moral.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 29 21:43:49 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 29 2008 - 21:43:49 EDT