By Morris Dean
The definition shown to the right probably should say believes "in fewer gods" rather than "in one fewer god," but never mind. It would appear, if we looked at it strictly logically, that the only person who isn't an atheist – aside from agnostics, of course – is the one who believes in more gods than anyone else.
So...do we even need the term "atheist"?
.jpg)
Well, now that we've all agreed on that, let's have a little comedy to help us put things in perspective:
| Copyright © 2015 by Morris Dean |
Try this talk by Chis Hedges on for size.
ReplyDeleteIn it he states unequivocally that he does not believe in a personal god, that all religion is metaphor and, that said, this is no reason not to fully embrace the spiritual quest.
My problem with the arguments of too many atheists (among whose number I am proud to count myself) is: their critique of religion is too often an attack on culture, dogma and tribalism. The New Atheists confuse the non-rational with the irrational.
http://www.dayonepatch.com/index.php?/topic/71188-atheist-chris-hedges-demolishes-atheist-sam-harris/
Bob, thanks for this. I have watched about 1/4 of the Harris-Hedges debate so far and will watch the rest of it later today. Since I have praised "The New Atheists," you have got me wondering about myself whether I have ever "confused the non-rational with the irrational." (I catch the distinction.)
DeleteI just finished watching the Harris-Hedges debate, and I notice that the title of the dayonepatch article you cite is the baffling, "Atheist Chris Hedges demolishes Atheist Sam Harris." Do you think the author's assessment of the debate is fair? I doubt that even Chris Hedges thinks so.
DeleteI haven't gone over the debate so I'm not sure what you mean by a fair assessment. Are you referring to the reference to Hedges as an atheist?
DeleteAs far as I remember the debate, Hedges thinks Harris is attacking a straw man--meaning Harris is attacking Bronze-age tribalism whereas modern religion has dispensed with much of the old mythic crap: miracles, personal god, exclusivity (Only My God can save you ), etc. All rational people reject all fundamentalism.
Bob, the assessment I meant was the one provided by the title's verb: "demolishes." But, now that you mention it, "atheist" as applied to Chris Hedges by the article's author is an assessment, isn't it? I had taken it at face value and even imagined that the debate had been billed as between two atheists. I now see that that is not the case so far as the Youtube video is concerned, sans the article's introduction. And, in fact, Hedges's Wikipedia entry identifies him as a Presbyterian minister! Funny that I was able to view the entire debate and not pick up on the apparent fact that Hedges not only "believes in God," but is also a Christian. I wonder whether it would be possible for me to reset my brain and watch the debate again as between atheist Harris and Christian Hedges and interpret Hedges's remarks very differently?
DeleteThe article author's "atheist" assessment is apparently based on the fact that Hedges "states, outright [in a talk on the question, "What Is Religion?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waNM0VF4ZBQ#t=11], that he doesn't believe in God. He stopped believing after witnessing the bloody civil war in Sarajevo where he said God obviously didn't have a plan for around 2000 children to die in that city. His life was not more important than the lives of those children. He personally witnessed that and outright states that this idea that a God is looking after us only exists within zones of safety where we can delude ourselves in narcissism." Well, I haven't watched that talk to hear the statement for myself to decide whether it sounded like Hedges was saying he was an atheist.
And now that I re-read your initial comment above, I see that you seem to have said that in the debate with Harris, Hedges "states unequivocally that he does not believe in a personal god, that all religion is metaphor and, that said, this is no reason not to fully embrace the spiritual quest." So your comment, too, set me up to watch a debate between two "atheists," and the web address of the link you provided in that same comment sealed the deal: http://www.dayonepatch.com/index.php?/topic/71188-atheist-chris-hedges-demolishes-atheist-sam-harris/.
Harris, by the way, favors spiritual quests also. There's a chapter about it in The End of Faith even: Chapter 7, "Experiments in Conscioiusness."
Of all the so-called New Atheists, I find Harris most compatible. Perhaps it is because he accepts the validity of alternate states (altered states?) of consciousness as valuable assets in the search for a more comprehensive appreciation of the universe. I personally find the kind of dialogue Harris proposes far more interesting than the more purely materialistic positions held by Dawkins. The real debate should not be between modern theists and atheists but between proponents of reasoned critical thinking and proponents of Wo wo like Deepak Chopra.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E99BdOfxAE
If I had any respect for Deepak prior to this debate, I pretty quickly lost it after his performance here. It wasn't even so much his sloppy thinking, but his losing his cool that was so disillusioning. He needs to cut back on his visits with that old fraud, Oprah and go back to the ashram for a bit of reprogramming.
Does any intelligent Christian today (besides Kyle Garza) actually believe in a personal God?
ReplyDeleteI've also wondered this question: would the term "Adeist" be helpful to anyone?
DeleteKyle, Merriam-Webster thinks "atheist" covers it: "athe·ist
Delete\ˈā-thē-ist\
noun
: a person who believes that God does not exist
Full Definition
:one who believes that there is no deity."
The direct link to the Hedges talk on You Tube is here.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waNM0VF4ZBQ