In our last two articles, we’ve explored one book in the exciting new field of cognitive science of religion. And we’ve seen how one of the findings in this area is that belief in God, or something like God, is natural to us, given the types of minds we have. Of course, this doesn’t show that one ought to believe Continue Reading …
Topic for #129: Is Religious Faith Rational?
Nathan Gilmour (Christian Humanist podcast) and Rob Dyer (God Complex Radio) joined Mark and Wes for a wide-ranging discussion on the reasonableness of religious belief, covering short articles by Alvin Plantinga, Antony Flew, Richard Swinburne, and others.
The Christlike Subversiveness of Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”
In 1979, John Cleese and Michael Palin had a debate about Monty Python’s film The Life of Brian with two defenders of the Christian faith — one an English bishop. The question is whether the film’s parody of institutionalized religion and religious hypocrisy amounts to ridiculing the personage of Jesus and Christianity in general.
Does Post-Modern Skepticism Support Religious Belief?
One of our listeners (and contributors! Thanks again!) Ernie P. has posted on our Facebook page: You all (on the podcast) seem to assume that ‘belief in the irrational’ is a strongly correlated with religious belief; I would argue that (depending on how you define it), it is a factor in all human belief, and the only real irrationality is Continue Reading …
Eric Reitan (via Pale Blue Dot) Refereeing the Atheism Debates
I’ve written before about Eric Reitan, a modern follower of Scheleirmacher, and on this episode of Conversations from the Pale Blue Dot, Reitan gives I think a great explanation of the disagreement between the new atheists and humanistic, liberal Christians: they may agree on nearly all of the same principles (being against Biblical inerrancy and other implausible and morally pernicious Continue Reading …
New Atheist Episode Thoughts: Skepoet, Harris on Faith, Politics and Religion
A “University Lecturer living in South Korea” calling himself Skepoet responded here to our episode. He gives a nice quote from Julian Baggini and makes some salient points about our discussion. One of his comments was that we didn’t seem to find an argument in Harris to critique. Here’s the argument as I remember it that we were focusing on: Continue Reading …
Swinburne Contra Dawkins on Complexity and Creation
Watch on YouTube. A name that popped up in Episode 43 and Episode 44 was that of Oxford philosophy professor Richard Swinburne. Swinburne has made his reputation positing analytic arguments in favor of Christian theism. As Robert pointed out toward the end of Episode 43, most Christians, even if sympathetic, would probably not find Swinburne’s arguments dispositive toward their belief. Even Continue Reading …
Episode 44: New Atheist Critiques of Religion (Citizens Only)
Discussing selections from Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel C. Dennett.
Should we be religious, or is religion just a bunch of superstitious nonsense that it’s past time for us to outgrow? Does faith lead to ceding to authority and potential violence? Can a reasonable person be religious? We say lots of rude things about these authors, and at times about their targets in this listener-requested episode featuring Mark, Wes, Seth, and Dylan. Read more about the topic.
End song: “Goddammit” by by Mark Lint and the Simulacra.
PREVIEW-Episode 44: New Atheist Critiques of Religion
Discussing selections from Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel C. Dennett.
Should we be religious, or is religion just a bunch of superstitious nonsense that it’s past time for us to outgrow? Does faith lead to ceding to authority and potential violence? Can a reasonable person be religious? We say lots of rude things about these authors, and at times about their targets in this listener-requested episode.
Topic for #44: “New Atheism”
We have long promised to more systematically cover these guys who generate so much fun sniping on our blog here, and as of last Sunday, the full as-of-now-regular podcaster lineup (myself, Seth, Wes, and Dylan; we will still have some guests on, though) recorded a discussion of: -The first two chapters of Sam Harris’s The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, Continue Reading …
Topic for #43: Arguments for the Existence of God
On many episodes we’ve mentioned in passing, or given some author’s criticism of, the classic arguments for the existence of God: -The ontological argument, whereby some quality of the idea of God itself is supposed to necessitate that such a being exists. The most famous versions are by Descartes and St. Anselm. -The cosmological argument, which deduces from the fact Continue Reading …
Defending Religion from the Left (Jackson Lears on Sam Harris)
Historian Jackson Lears has an interesting attack on Sam Harris in The Nation. I’m not endorsing everything in this everything-but-the-kitchen sink assault (on both Harris’ religious and moral theories), but it’s interesting and worth a read. — Wes
Atheists Against Atheism
Not all atheists are on board with ‘the four horsemen’ of the New Atheism: Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens. Julian Baggini, podcaster and author of Atheism: A Very Short Introductionpoints out their generally unsophisticated grasp of religion. I met Baggini in New York last December when he came to speak to a small group of us on the subject of Continue Reading …
Does Atheism Entail Nihilism? (Or, is God Necessary for Morality?)
An interesting debate. And it continues on Prosblogion. Update: Now that I’ve listened to the whole thing, I have to say Craig is in over his head and Kagan makes minced meat of him. I wish they had been more evenly matched. Update II: Here’s an interesting article by Wes Morriston (who linked to it in the Prosblogion comments) rebutting Continue Reading …
Notes on Dennett’s “Breaking the Spell,” Part 1
For our atheism episode (which has, incidentally been pushed back to be recorded in late May or possibly June… sorry, Russ!), I’m trying to read through the most popular of the “new atheist” books, and I’m sure we’ll only end up discussing some select portions of the books in any detail, so as I’m going through these, I’m going to Continue Reading …
“New” Atheism as Cultural Movement
An article by Paul Pardi (“Philosophy News Service”) at the Huffington Post sums up the significance of “new atheism:” 1. The arguments of Harris, Dennett, Dawkins and Hitchens tend not to be “new” and don’t engage the actual arguments of liberal theologians. 2. As a social movement, they’re nonetheless affecting the perception that the mass of people have on “the Continue Reading …
Colbert vs. O’Reilly on the Argument from Design: Best Comic Use of St. Thomas Aquinas Award
The Colbert Report Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Quarrel Between the Thomists and the Straussians
Brian Leiter bizarrely endorses this idiotic review by Aristotle scholar Peter Simpson of Richard G. Stevens’ Political Philosophy: An Introduction. It’s clear that the logic behind this endorsement is that Simpson criticizes the book because it has been written by a Straussian, and Leiter despises Straussians. Unfortunately, the logic behind the review is that Simpson is a Christian and he Continue Reading …
Massimo Pigliucci on In-Your-Face Atheism
Pigliucci strongly rebukes the organization of which he is a lifetime honorary member, for an ad calling all religions “scams”: First, the ad is simply making a preposterous claim that cannot possibly be backed up by factual evidence, which means that, technically, it is lying. Not a good virtue for self-righteous critical thinkers… Yet, several atheists I have encountered have no Continue Reading …
Judging Religion vs. Judging “Twilight”
Some of our ongoing atheism discussion here brought to mind an analogy that I think is best illustrated by a comic from Lore Sjoberg’s Bad Gods. See the comic on Lore’s site. Punch line aside, the point should be clear. To argue effectively against religion, you have to be familiar with religion, and to argue it on a point-by-point basis Continue Reading …