|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: *Anarcissie**Anarcissie* Date: May 12, 2007 08:07
[This is probably much too long for the limited attention-span
of Usenetters, but is does give an interesting overview of the
counteroffensive against religion, especially fundamentalist
religion, now being effected by various parties, and does
raise the problem of what will replace religion if and when
it retreats or falls. I disagree with the conclusion.]
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/lazare
Among the Disbelievers
by DANIEL LAZARE
[from the May 28, 2007 issue]
|
| Show full article (26.14Kb) |
|
| | 62 Comments |
|
|
Author: ArtArt Date: May 12, 2007 08:30
On 12 May 2007 08:07:00 -0700, *Anarcissie* gmail.com>
wrote:
>[This is probably much too long for the limited attention-span
>of Usenetters, but is does give an interesting overview of the
>counteroffensive against religion, especially fundamentalist
>religion, now being effected by various parties, and does
>raise the problem of what will replace religion if and when
>it retreats or falls. I disagree with the conclusion.]
>
> http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/lazare
What will replace religions is knowledge of their mystical and
spiritual core ... providing mankind doesn't eradicate all life
on planet earth first, and make earth uninhabitable.
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Don TuiteDon Tuite Date: May 12, 2007 08:32
Russell is curiously (to me) absent from the review.
It has been many years since I devoured all the essays, and my
critical faculties may have been indifferent at the time, but I had
two impressions. One was R was an appealing writer whose style did
not descend to mean-spiritedness, but whose arguments were
nevertheless devastating. The other was that criticism of R seemed to
focus on his being a randy sort or that the forces of Good were locked
in a deadly war the Russkies, and Russell was their judas goat.
Does Bertrand Russell come up at all in these latter-day discussions?
Don
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sir FrederickSir Frederick Date: May 12, 2007 08:50
On 12 May 2007 08:07:00 -0700, *Anarcissie* gmail.com> wrote:
>[This is probably much too long for the limited attention-span
>of Usenetters, but is does give an interesting overview of the
>counteroffensive against religion, especially fundamentalist
>religion, now being effected by various parties, and does
>raise the problem of what will replace religion if and when
>it retreats or falls. I disagree with the conclusion.]
>
> http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/lazare
>
>Among the Disbelievers
>
>by DANIEL LAZARE
>
>[from the May 28, 2007 issue]
> Religion in various forms is as ensconced in the common
human brain as is language.
The thread topic is as meaningful as "After Language".
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ike milliganike milligan Date: May 12, 2007 08:54
"*Anarcissie*" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178982420.872362.118200@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
[This is probably much too long for the limited attention-span
of Usenetters, but is does give an interesting overview of the
counteroffensive against religion, especially fundamentalist
religion, now being effected by various parties, and does
raise the problem of what will replace religion if and when
it retreats or falls. I disagree with the conclusion.]
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/lazare
I tried to read it but it was too long.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: EnkiduEnkidu Date: May 12, 2007 08:59
> "But while united in their
> resolve to throw the bum out--God, that is--the antireligious forces
> appear to have given little thought to what to replace Him with should
> He go."
"Every sensible man, every honest man, must hold the Christian sect in
horror. But what shall we substitute in its place? you say. What? A
ferocious animal has sucked the blood of my relatives. I tell you to rid
yourselves of this beast, and you ask me what you shall put in its place?"
-Voltaire
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it.
-- Oscar Wilde
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: ImmortalistImmortalist Date: May 12, 2007 09:47
On May 12, 8:07 am, *Anarcissie* gmail.com> wrote:> [This is probably much too long for the limited attention-span
> of Usenetters, but is does give an interesting overview of the
> counteroffensive against religion, especially fundamentalist
> religion, now being effected by various parties, and does
> raise the problem of what will replace religion if and when
> it retreats or falls. I disagree with the conclusion.]
>
> http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/lazare
>
Humanism has long ago become the replacement, right? The religion of
Humanity.
|
| Show full article (5.74Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Don PhillipsonDon Phillipson Date: May 12, 2007 11:35
> . . . we are still in the position of the French revolutionary who has
> not moved beyond antiroyalism. Atheism is a purely negative ideology,
> which is its problem. If one does not believe in God, what should one
> believe in instead? Dawkins thinks he has an answer--science--but his
> understanding of the term is embarrassingly crude and empirical.
Can anyone cite (and attribute) Chesterton's comment on this
point: something to the effect that the problem remains that
people who ostentatiously dump belief in God lay themselves
open to belief in any snake-oil salesman who may attract
their ear?
|
| Show full article (1.11Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Paul IlechkoPaul Ilechko Date: May 12, 2007 15:46
*Anarcissie* quoted:
> But we are still in the position of the French revolutionary who has
> not moved beyond antiroyalism. Atheism is a purely negative ideology,
> which is its problem.
Except that atheism is not an ideology. Neither is faith, for that
matter, although religion is. Atheism is an explicit rejection of
certain ideological (and other) constructs, but is not a replacement for
them.
> If one does not believe in God, what should one
> believe in instead?
This question makes absolutely no sense, it's setting up a false
dichotomy. There is no "instead" required. It's like asking, "if one
does not believe in the tooth fairy, what should one believe in instead?"
Now, there are questions that religion attempts to answer that need to
be answered in some other way once God is dismissed, but that's not the
same thing as an alternative to God.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael GrayMichael Gray Date: May 12, 2007 18:37
>...does
>raise the problem of what will replace religion...
:
One may well ask what will replace the common cold when it is
eliminated?
Why does anything have to replace the contageous mental illness of
religion if it is cured?
--
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
