---In [email protected], <[email protected]> wrote : ---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote : From: aryavazhi <[email protected]> ---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote : From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <[email protected]>
...But many so called atheists today consider Dawkins to be one of the leading apologists for atheism. Don't be an idiot, John. *No one* considers Dawkins a "leading apologist for atheism" because being an atheist requires no apology. Good to know, that he is not a leading apologist. What I don't get is, what's all the fuss about? Why would an atheist want to convince anyone of his persuasion? If you feel, there is no meaning or sense in life, neither good or bad karma, if you believe in a sort of nihilism (?), then what's in for you, convincing anyone about it? I accept totally that the atheist position is a complete valid one, but then you cannot know either way, and it's everybodies choice. Perhaps the atheists would like to be treated equally with others that have the opposing idea. In some countries you can be killed for having such a view of the world, and discriminated against in many, many others. Establishing legal equality usually requires a minority to make some kind of fuss to get leverage in this direction. As for Dawkins, I found his book entertaining, but he does tend to chase after the invisible man in the sky version of god as opposed to the invisible whatever version of god, such as the classical theism version that Judy was always bringing up in the previous year or two. To me all gods are alike, they are thoughts in my mind, Zeus, Yahweh, Baal, Brahma, Thor, they are just concepts, lacking even the reality of a cup of coffee. They are virtual realities, like Sherlock Holmes and Batman. All atheists would like to see is some concrete evidence, rather than the pretence of knowledge that belief is. Lack of belief does not seem to adversely affect the lives of atheists in comparison to others except where there is discrimination based on that position. Atheism really isn't a belief, it is simply the lack of evidence for the theistic position makes it unlikely those theistic beliefs have reality behind them. The atheist position is thus 'I do not see how god x, as described by so-and-so, could be real, it's unconvincing, so I do not bother myself with looking at the world this way'. There are a few atheists for whom 'there is no god' is a 'true' belief, and they can be just as fanatical as fundamentalist religionists, and they are ones most likely to be in your face about it. But basically a real non theist is just apathetic about the whole idea of god and gods. I have a certain fondness for Zeus, even though I do not think Zeus exists except in the form of thoughts and effigies and stories. I think I have seen five different cinematic versions of the opening of the Red Sea as described in Exodus (starting with the silent film era) and it is fun to watch, but there is no way I can believe this actually happened. No one observes things like this happening today. However if you interpret the story as a metaphor for the mind's ridding itself of delusion and the desire for more freedom, it might have some applicability.
