I appreciate your effort here to temper atheist indignation but it seems to me it has been institutionalised faith that’s been callng the shots regarding the identity of the unbeliever. It is the responsibility of the faithful to defend their doctrine & not the other way around.
-
-
-
I'm not sure how that relates.
-
Perhaps I misread your blogpost. I had the impression you were discussing the dialectic between religionists & atheists & how both succumb to a tribally identified dogma.
-
Not remotely, no.
-
Not remotely?
-
You can read it and discover it's a comparison of two different arguments about atheism and dealing with religion in society by atheists or you can not. Your call.
-
Right. And your conclusion seemed to accept the argument from the side that seemed to say, from my reading, that the atheist owes the religionist a fair hearing of their beliefs. An argument I hear all the time & do not support. Just saying.
-
That isn't even close to the argument. Nor did I say anything which could give that impression.
- 11 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Luminescent. I'm going to have to ask you and James to stop writing and hide everything you have written from me until I have gotten a few things done around the house. Thanks.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks Helen. I abandoned religious belief a long time ago but I became one of these nihilistic men that Peterson is trying to help. Does James's book discuss an alternative to a religious meaning of life?
-
It breaks down what religious meaning consists of - community, purpose, morality etc.
-
James book on death is awesome. I found much meaning in it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm also an antitheist, but I want the eventual eradication of religion not just political equality with it...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'll start there, thank you.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I read both books and now this. Spot on. But Silverman's approach is easier and would let me join the circus of outrage, no? Lindsey's approach would require me to be mature and logical and a skeptical. And less tribal. Can I do that?
-
Not sure there’s anything tribal about disagreeing with a characterization.
-
I was referring to the difference between Silverman and Lindsay's approaches. I haven't formed an opinion on Peterson. I like some of his arguments, but I have also run across some who interpret his cautious, intentional, and articulate speech.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
