About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Thursday, April 5, 2007 - 8:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
That kind of thinking could impact Objectivism from the inside... but for now, let's pick on the other guys...

from CNN
Why this scientist believes in God
POSTED: 7:15 a.m. EDT, April 5, 2007
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html
I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.
As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.
Well, OK, I've made the same argument myself.  As an atheist with an open mind, I have allowed that if God created the Universe, then by studying science, we learn God's handiwork. God invented mathematics in order that he could bring the Universe into being; evolution is how God makes species... and so on... 

But, then... we get this...

But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. ...  Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.


Blah, blah, blah... now we are down to the Jedi and Penn & Teller debunking the New Age...  yadda yadda...
Nothing new...  You'd think with two (count 'em two) doctorates, the guy could say something we had not heard before... Sheesh, it's just recycled Aquinas...


Post 1

Friday, April 6, 2007 - 11:42amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for posting the link, Michael.  I love this part:
My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
Atheism is not dogma.  Atheism is the default position.  To go back to the "Force Skeptics Page" story; suppose we give the name Forcists to those who believe in The Force.  Then those who don't believe in The Force could be called Aforcists.  So then someone can make the statement that "Aforcism is the most daring of all dogmas, ...".

In his book "Atheism: A Very Short Introduction" (a book I can't recommend very strongly), Julian Baggini says:
Atheists subscribe to a certain world view that includes numerous beliefs about the world and what is in it.  Theists say that there is something else that also exists - God.  If theists did not exist, atheists still would, but perhaps there would be no special name for them.  But since theism has become so dominant in our world, with so many people believing in God or gods, atheism has come to be defined in contrast to theism.
Thanks,
Glenn


Post 2

Friday, April 6, 2007 - 10:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When Star Wars first came out in 1977, Erwin S. "Filthy Pierre" Strauss had a long critique and several of his points involved the "hokey old religion" and the relative status of Han Solo.  (For Strauss bios see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Strauss and also http://www.scifiinc.net/scifiinc/gallery/bio/Strauss,_Erwin_S..htm

Filthy took over editorship of The Libertarian Connection, a "fanzine" run by Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw under the nomes de guerre of Skye d'Aureous and Natalee Hall.  That was where I first encountered Tibor Machan, Steven Holbrooke, Robert Poole Jr., Murray N. Rothbard, and many other writers.  We submitted two mimeograph stencils every six weeks.  I wrote  under my own name ("Mick Marotta" back then) as did Tibor Machan and many others, though there were also The Wolverine, Thor Xavier Challenger, Adam Strange, Aragorn Beowulf, Garwood, and many, many others. Filthy took over the LC, but years before, Skye and Natalee took over his vitamin business when he went to Alaska to work as an engineer in order to earn the money to start a shipboard offshore gambling project ("Jolly Roger') that never came to fruition.  It got Durk & Sandy into the vitamin business.  (See: http://www.life-enhancement.com/)  It has been a few years, but I was a big fan of their intelligence increasing formulae.  Be all that as it may, the fact remains that the cold equations have always driven much of libertarian thought. 

Libertarian science fiction author L. Neil Smith wrote several Lando Calrissian novels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventures_of_Lando_Calrissian) but as I recall there were no "atheist" (aforcist) passages of note.


Post 3

Saturday, April 7, 2007 - 1:14pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
     "I find...your lack of faith in The Force...disturbing."

MTFBWY --- maybe (cough, ack, ungh-h-h, arrgh-h-h!)

LLAP
J:D


Post 4

Saturday, April 7, 2007 - 1:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Why no one has yet thanked Scott Cram for taking the time to find and post this amazingly important link is beyond me.

Thanks, Scott.


Post 5

Sunday, April 8, 2007 - 8:01amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Well, I did sanction it.  Also, I actually printed it all out and put it in with my other "Objectivist" offshoot materials, a box of file folders, etc., of interesting material, but, yes, thanks to Scott...

In his criticism of the first Star Wars movie, Filthy Pierre noted that Han Solo made the rational choice of taking his reward and leaving, though offering Luke a weak "MTFBWY."  However, he returned, of course. 

Note, also, that in the Empire Strikes Back, Lando actually betrays our heroes ("I had no choice. They're everywhere.") and Han takes that at face value indicating that recognized the decision as correct, given the circumstances: morality ends at the barrel of a gun.

Religionists -- and religious "Objectivists" -- would want everyone to stand up for their principles and get gloriously killed.


Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.