Hypothesis: no one has read BtB after the New Atheism rant.

A warrior (Bruno) and a small dragon (Fiona) team up for fun and plunder in this fantasy comic strip.

Moderators: kmd, Ian McDonald, Limax

Hypothesis: no one has read BtB after the New Atheism rant.

Postby qwerts on Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:27 am

Yes/No?
Currently being Mean to YOU.
User avatar
qwerts
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:16 am

Postby Limax on Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:59 am

You know, I have no idea where you get your data f r o m, but I still read BtB every Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
.__ ___ __ _... ._ _

A salted slug gathers no moss.

This post is brought to you by the number 6.
User avatar
Limax
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Livermore, CA, USA

Postby qwerts on Thu Dec 13, 2007 10:35 am

The frequency of forum posts.
Currently being Mean to YOU.
User avatar
qwerts
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:16 am

Postby Ian McDonald on Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:16 am

People may still be reading BTB, I just wonder if they bother reading my Tribune columns. I got all of two e-mails responding to the latest column, both positive, I'm pleased to report. I did think my latest ramblings were gonna stir up a little more discussion, but dem's da breaks. :)
User avatar
Ian McDonald
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu May 18, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: St. John's, NF Canada

Postby kmd on Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:03 pm

Your Tribune's are always so level-headed, and you're such a great guy, who is going to give you a verbal smack down? It would be like kicking a puppy. :D
User avatar
kmd
Extra-Dimensional Entity
 
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed May 10, 2000 11:00 pm

Postby N. Cognito on Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:00 am

I think it is fair to remind you that, when critics of The God Delusion took Richard Dawkins to task for not reading up on the best-known books on theology, Dawkins responded by saying "Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in leprechauns?" Hmmm, I wonder how the good Professor would respond to a Creationist who, after penning an anti-evolutionist tract, said "I know evolution is claptrap [i.e. "leprechology"], so I didn't need to read any books about it!"?


Okay, there's a pretty large difference between the two. When someone dismisses science (ie "facts"), it seems reasonable to expect that person to have their own facts to support their assertions.

However, arguing against theology (ie "faith") isn't a matter of proving or disproving evidence. Arguing on any side of theology is, essentially, an appeal to people's sense of reason. Ergo, those credited with writing well-respected (ie "not Ann Coulter") books on theology are probably, in fact, very reasonable people. Thus, Dawkins isn't trying to change their minds. And neither is the atheist community at large. The New Atheism movement is about introducing a higher level of thought to the Christian-conservative group, whose faith tends to blind their reason.

Yes, there are a lot of bitter atheists in this New movement. I do agree with your (ie "McDonald's) post, on the whole. I just felt it was necessary to clarify one or two minor points
N. Cognito
Junior Keenspotter
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 2:10 am

Postby Ian McDonald on Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:51 pm

N. Cognito wrote:
I think it is fair to remind you that, when critics of The God Delusion took Richard Dawkins to task for not reading up on the best-known books on theology, Dawkins responded by saying "Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in leprechauns?" Hmmm, I wonder how the good Professor would respond to a Creationist who, after penning an anti-evolutionist tract, said "I know evolution is claptrap [i.e. "leprechology"], so I didn't need to read any books about it!"?


Okay, there's a pretty large difference between the two. When someone dismisses science (ie "facts"), it seems reasonable to expect that person to have their own facts to support their assertions.


But a Creationist would no doubt assert that evolution is not real science, and thus, its "facts" can't be trusted. They would then point to their own set of "facts" which they would claim "prove" the Book of Genesis to be literally true.

But this is beside the point (and I certainly don't want to start an Evolution vs. Creationism debate here *shudder!*). The point is, if I'm going to write a book on a major issue, in which I want to show that the "other side" is wrong, it might behoove me to at least check out the best arguments generated by the other side, rather than just dismissing them as "claptrap".

However, arguing against theology (ie "faith") isn't a matter of proving or disproving evidence. Arguing on any side of theology is, essentially, an appeal to people's sense of reason. Ergo, those credited with writing well-respected (ie "not Ann Coulter") books on theology are probably, in fact, very reasonable people.


I'm glad you think so. I agree.

Thus, Dawkins isn't trying to change their minds.


Dude, he compared theology to the study of leprechauns!

And neither is the atheist community at large. The New Atheism movement is about introducing a higher level of thought to the Christian-conservative group, whose faith tends to blind their reason.


Well, of the authors I cited (Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins), their main focus doesn't seem to me to be "let's introduce conservative Christians, whose faith unfortunately tends to blind their reason, to a higher level of thought" as opposed to "religion is evil, people who believe in God are deluded idiots, and we must do what we can to stamp out the virus of faith!"

Personally, I'd applaud the New Atheism movement (though not agree with everything about it) if their focus was as you claimed, N! If indeed that is the focus, their "leaders" could be doing a much better job of it, IMHO!
User avatar
Ian McDonald
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu May 18, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: St. John's, NF Canada

By the way...

Postby Ian McDonald on Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:01 pm

Even some non-believers have a problem with the current New Atheism movement.

Check it out... if only for the hilarious cartoon that accompanies the article! :D
User avatar
Ian McDonald
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu May 18, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: St. John's, NF Canada

Postby AisA on Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:37 am

Apropos of nearly nothing, and probably innapropriate to nearly everything, I just ran across this link on a Metafilter thread and immediately thought of you....it's good for a giggle, if naught else:

http://www.cracked.com/article_15663_go ... ee-on.html
More Bruno the Bandit at www.aimcomics.com!
User avatar
AisA
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:59 am

Postby Ian McDonald on Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:14 am

AisA wrote:Apropos of nearly nothing, and probably innapropriate to nearly everything, I just ran across this link on a Metafilter thread and immediately thought of you....it's good for a giggle, if naught else:

http://www.cracked.com/article_15663_go ... ee-on.html


Actually, I was gonna post that link here as well, but you beat me to it, AisA! Must be that psychic link between us!! :D
User avatar
Ian McDonald
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu May 18, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: St. John's, NF Canada

Postby cafeeine on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:47 pm

Okay, now I feel cheated (by myself) for not reading the forums. What atheism rant?

In my really hectic past few months I always found time to pop Bruno open on a tab, but not read any more.
User avatar
cafeeine
Keenspotter Supreme
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 11:16 pm

Postby Freak on Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:39 am

Go to the main page, and scroll down to the Nov. 28 Tribune.
Freak
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 11:00 pm

 

Return to Bruno The Bandit

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest