tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post3002861018779240851..comments2023-10-21T16:25:58.899+01:00Comments on Three Score Years And Ten: God Save Me From This Fellow AtheistHarry Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-84778695679406747652007-06-22T14:43:00.000+01:002007-06-22T14:43:00.000+01:00hughes views,And that intelligence might, of cours...hughes views,<BR/>And that intelligence might, of course, no longer still exist.Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01833380054575757928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-40318129322308998792007-06-22T10:43:00.000+01:002007-06-22T10:43:00.000+01:00Thanks for drawing my attention to Antony Flew - h...Thanks for drawing my attention to Antony Flew - his seems to be a rather late and muddled 'conversion' to a view of a strange sort of God. Back to the ancient concept of 'God in the gaps' perhaps, i.e. being a shorthand for the things that are currently beyond our comprehension. Of course if some intelligence did design our universe (as Mr Flew seems now to think is possible) the question of who or what designed the intelligence remains...Hughes Viewshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01192390547169979749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-34678879708797410982007-06-21T20:02:00.000+01:002007-06-21T20:02:00.000+01:00hughes views,I missed most of the TV series, but w...hughes views,<BR/>I missed most of the TV series, but will look out for repeats. Antony Flew was a philosopher of atheism and then he changed his mind. Perhaps I should find out his fresh reasoning.Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01833380054575757928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-54086800267278516562007-06-21T16:48:00.000+01:002007-06-21T16:48:00.000+01:00Did you see any of Jonathon Millar's TV programmes...Did you see any of Jonathon Millar's TV programmes about Atheism? He managed to present a far more measured approach to the subject (even though one of his interviewees was the rather sinister (imho) Dawkins)...Hughes Viewshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01192390547169979749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-59083223060295090082007-06-21T09:46:00.000+01:002007-06-21T09:46:00.000+01:00There were Huxleys all over the place on these mat...There were Huxleys all over the place on these matters. In addition to the writer Aldous Huxley and TH (Thomas)Huxley (who first used the term "agnostic") there was Julian Huxley who was amongst those (like HG Wells) who extended Darwinism into eugenics. But later Julian went on to condemn fascists for further extending this into racialism. Links to some of the rest of the family are also given here -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_HuxleyHarry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01833380054575757928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-63811277842553031762007-06-21T02:14:00.000+01:002007-06-21T02:14:00.000+01:00yes - should be Thomas Huxley - that's what happen...yes - should be <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley" REL="nofollow">Thomas Huxley</A> - that's what happens when i try and use half-read 2 minute googlings to try and look more knowledgeablecalgacushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18253675072578015749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-4734904080552053152007-06-21T02:10:00.000+01:002007-06-21T02:10:00.000+01:00I (and these web sites) may have him confused with...I (and these web sites) may have him confused with Thomas Huxley - not surecalgacushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18253675072578015749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-65198278184873521962007-06-21T02:08:00.000+01:002007-06-21T02:08:00.000+01:00Could well be Harry.I don't think i disagree with ...Could well be Harry.I don't think i disagree with a word you've said here.<BR/><BR/>I tend to say i 'dont know' rather than that i 'don't believe' - but i agree its just as reasonable (maybe more reasonable) to say there's no reason to believe without proof.<BR/><BR/>I think that while morally on lots of issues in politics and life generally not choosing to be for or against something is copping out (certainly not accusing you of that) there should usually be an element of doubt about most things even when you've chosen (so new evidence can still change your opinion). <BR/><BR/>Absolute certainty tends to lead to seeing only what you want to see (much as with Blair, Bush and Iraqi WMDs).<BR/><BR/>Since i'm rambling i might as well add some <A HREF="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/sn-huxley.html" REL="nofollow">quotes from Aldous Huxley</A> who (i think?) invented the word agnosticism :<BR/><BR/>"They were quite sure that they had attained a certain "gnosis" -- had more or less successfully solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.... <BR/><BR/>follow your reason as far as it will take you.... And negatively: In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. ... <BR/><BR/>That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism."<BR/><BR/>On <A HREF="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/huxley_and_agnosticism.html" REL="nofollow">agnosticism vs Christianity</A><BR/>"The real difference is this: the Christian says that he has knowledge; the Agnostic admits that he has none; and yet the Christian accuses the Agnostic of arrogance, and asks him how he has the impudence to admit the limitations of his mind. To the Agnostic every fact is a torch, and by this light, and this light only, he walks."calgacushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18253675072578015749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-53319351742730768132007-06-21T00:09:00.000+01:002007-06-21T00:09:00.000+01:00Calgacus,I do not believe that God exists, so I am...Calgacus,<BR/>I do not believe that God exists, so I am an atheist. However, I agree that we can't prove whether or not God exists and that the only intellectually sound position is therefore that of the agnostic.<BR/><BR/>There is, however, a strong argument on the atheist's side in that it isn't reasonable to ask us to prove a negative. The onus of proof is on the side of those who claim that God exists. I know of no arguments that give us a reason for believing in the existence of God. So to me a well argued religious person's belief is less reasonable then that of well argued atheism.<BR/><BR/>But I agree that if the Big Bang theory is correct, this does not end the argument as God could always have set that going. We are then into the problem of whether God was a first cause. A matter which is so confusing that some theologians put God outside of time to resolve it (whatever being "outside of time" might mean).<BR/><BR/>I would also argue that it is possible to give meaning (or meanings) to life and to have moral standards without having these things shaped for us by a God. Indeed the notion of God only complicates things. Are meaning and morality so because God commands them or because they have a inner-logic of there own which God (better than anyone) knows he has to pursue?<BR/><BR/>In "What Is It All About? : Philosophy and the Meaning of Life", by Julian Baggini (Granta Books, 2004/5, paperback £7.99) tackles a part of the problem well and from an atheist's position. Far better then Dawkins and Grayling with their dogmatic arguments against dogmatic forms of religion. Baggini merely has a habit of illustrating his point with stories from films - few of which I have seen.<BR/><BR/>I suspect that the differences in our two positions are more matters of taste than logic - as on Iraq?Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01833380054575757928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-47444647546477522422007-06-20T22:28:00.000+01:002007-06-20T22:28:00.000+01:00I've not read Grayling but i have read Dawkins and...I've not read Grayling but i have read Dawkins and your criticims of their extreme version of atheism seem bang on to me.<BR/><BR/>I'm an agnostic as I don't believe its possible to know whether there's a God of some kind or not (and even if i had proof there was one it wouldn't necessarily mean i thought it should be obeyed - unless it proved to be a very enlightened God and i managed to achieve enlightenment ;-) )<BR/><BR/>(the hardline atheists may accuse me of being afraid of offending / being criticised by the religious here - but there's no real stigma attached to being agnostic or atheist in the UK)<BR/><BR/>To say for instance, as some atheist scientists do that 'the Big Bang disproves the theory of Creation' is nonsense. It disproves the very silly literal interpretations of the Bible and the theory that the Earth is only as old as that book (4,000 years).<BR/><BR/>It does not explain where the energy or matter for the Big Bang came from.<BR/><BR/>Now religion doesn't help much here either as if you answer the question 'What created the Earth/the universe/multi-verse?' and answer it 'God did' you then have to ask 'Where did God come from ? /Who created them?'<BR/><BR/>So Harry I agree with you that atheists determined to prove to everyone that there is no God are as extreme and unreasonable in their views as crusading/jihading religious fundamentalists with literal interpretations of old texts.<BR/><BR/>Religions also at least deal with questions like 'What is morally right/wrong?' . 'How should we live?' , 'What is the meaning of life?'. Some religious people are far too dogmatic about the answers but life would be empty if we tried to restrict it entirely to the scientific approach in all fields - or pretend that humans can really be perfectly objective and see the 'one truth' through science. That's as dogmatic as the fundamentalist wing of any religion.calgacushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18253675072578015749noreply@blogger.com