Remember, old chap, this is Rationalia, not some sort of weird serious atheist website...Stein wrote:
You think this is all so funny.

Remember, old chap, this is Rationalia, not some sort of weird serious atheist website...Stein wrote:
You think this is all so funny.
I find his constant attempt to shoehorn objective morality and "spirituality" into atheism tiresome. He reminds me too much of the A-plussers in that respect.Stein wrote:Now, any thoughts on what Harris is saying there?
Beliefs can act as catalysts for action. They can guide behaviour. It may even be ethical to kill people for believing them.Stein wrote:any thoughts on what Harris is saying there?
The first thing that struck me about that passage was that it's entirely possible for someone (say a fundamentalist Muslim) to hang that charge on him too. His belief that there is something inherently right about western culture and inherently wrong about Islamic culture smacks of fundamentalism too. Indeed, he's a fundamentalist within the atheist community. Behead the fucker!!Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Where Harris gets it spectacularly wrong, IMO, is that he seems to forget that beliefs are subject to change - sometimes gradual, sometimes incredibly sudden - to call for the death of fundamentalists based on the notion that "Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others" ignores this (if you'll forgive the pun) fundamental fact about belief.
I'll start paying attention to Harris when he finally gets round to publishong his Morality Equation.Xamonas Chegwé wrote:I find his constant attempt to shoehorn objective morality and "spirituality" into atheism tiresome. He reminds me too much of the A-plussers in that respect.Stein wrote:Now, any thoughts on what Harris is saying there?
And what is also thoughtless is just how few -- if any -- online denizens from within the online atheist community ever bother to challenge, and challenge sharply, blatantly thought-control crap like Harris's. I can't prove that this killer would have actually refrained from allowing himself to reach the boiling point of murder in confronting three Muslims over parking, had he also viewed online postings from atheists sharply challenging the Harrises and their fundy-esque ilk. But unchallenged spewing from Harris and from online creeps in Harris's fundy corner certainly doesn't help here, especially when never ever challenged by any online atheists.Xamonas Chegwé wrote:Where Harris gets it spectacularly wrong, IMO, is that he seems to forget that beliefs are subject to change - sometimes gradual, sometimes incredibly sudden - to call for the death of fundamentalists based on the notion that "Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others" ignores this (if you'll forgive the pun) fundamental fact about belief.
It is always worthwhile attempting non-violent, dialogue-based methods to counter dangerous beliefs. It is only dangerous acts which need to be met with whatever means are proportionate and necessary.
Oy!Ian wrote:Stein, having a sense of humor is a requirement for this forum. It helps to have a dark and/or silly one, but any sense of humor at all really is necessary.
This is not the world-famous Great Scholastic Society for Atheistic Thinking and Debate. It's more like the back end of a half-empty pub on a side street somewhere in Heathen Town. And we're all drunk with no bouncer on duty.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests