“I disagree, Orn; I have heard each of the points she mentions verbatim from members of this list. For that reason alone, I thought she wrote a robust, albeit reactionary, article on these points.” – CJ
What exactly do you disagree with Chris?...You agree that her piece was reactionary. I agree that it was ‘robust’ if one uses vigorous, rough, crude, boisterous, rich etc. as how the term is used. However, if you mean it to mean “ strong enough to withstand intellectual challenge”, this may be so IF one accepts anecdotal evidence as being ‘strong enough….’. Returning to our original claims, perhaps you are suggesting that she supported her beliefs somehow somewhere. Perhaps you are suggesting that her style was not an appeal to the/her people. Perhaps you don’t find her words to be memes that many atheists project upon the world. Perhaps you see some sort of analytical rigor in her work. I don’t see it in any of these ways. Thus, I find it extraordinarily lacking when it comes doing “a good job of dispelling some of the …[myths] regarding the faithless.” Of course, perhaps for some, doing ‘a good job’ means preaching to the choir? Difficult to tell. On Feb 7, 8:47 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > I disagree, Orn; I have heard each of the points she mentions verbatim from > members of this list. For that reason alone, I thought she wrote a robust, > albeit reactionary, article on these points. > > On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 7:17 PM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > “I thought this was a very interesting and informative read, which did > > a good > > job of dispelling some of the pervasive untruths and misperceptions > > regarding the faithless. Thoughts?” – CJ > > > I started a detailed deconstruction and analysis of her piece and, > > after almost an hour gave up due to the extraordinarily large quantity > > of confused, opinionated and totally unsupported beliefs she was > > presenting. At first I had hoped to have some true meat to deal with… > > and perhaps even a lucid and accurate list. Sadly, I find it > > extraordinarily lacking. Yes, without presenting my specific > > criticisms I too can be charged with similar proclamations by opinion. > > However, hopefully, if carefully examined, most can see how this > > appears to be more of a reactionary piece…appealing to the people > > using common memes rather than anything of either literary or > > analytical rigor. It certainly does nothing at all like doing “a good > > job of dispelling some of the…[myths] regarding the faithless.” Would > > that it be otherwise! We atheists could use some unassailable clarity > > and logic when it comes to such issues. Sadly, Ms. Jacoby exhibits > > neither. > > > On Feb 6, 3:06 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 1COM, thanks! That worked. :-) > > > > On Feb 6, 9:26 am, 1CellOfMany <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I just clicked on the link in the first post of this discussion (Feb. > > > > 3rd) and it took me to the article, which is dated Feb.2nd 2010. Try > > > > this link: > >http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/spirited_atheist/2010/02/a... > > > > > On Feb 6, 4:04 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Sadly, I got to the link long after the day whatever the article was > > > > > had been printed...and can't find the original. > > > > > > On Feb 5, 11:10 pm, 1CellOfMany <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I agree that the article is well written and that her views may be > > > > > > representative of many atheists. However, I have encountered a > > > > > > plethora of atheists who speak as if they believe the majority of > > > > > > people who believe in God are fundamentalist creationists or rabid > > > > > > jihad'i terrorists; who talk down to the believers in the audience > > and > > > > > > tell them what fools they are, then, when accused of trying to > > > > > > "convert" us to their belief say, "I don't care what you believe." > > I > > > > > > am tired of being lumped in with the foolish people who try to get > > > > > > their literal interpretations of Genesis incorporated into science > > > > > > curricula. (I believe in evolution and that science is as important > > as > > > > > > religion to the advancement of civilization, thank you.) I think > > they > > > > > > give religion a bad reputation, just as the more aggressive and > > self- > > > > > > righteous atheists give atheism a bad rep. I have no problem with > > > > > > sharing ideas in a logical and open-minded fashion, but if you > > > > > > disagree, support your argument with facts and logic, not with > > > > > > diatribe and polemic. [Sorry, this rant was brought on by some > > > > > > threads inhttp://www.philosophyforum.com] <[ :-)= Rich > > > > > > > On Feb 3, 2:29 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/spirited_atheist/2010/02/a... > > > > > > > > I thought this was a very interesting and informative read, which > > did a good > > > > > > > job of dispelling some of the pervasive untruths and > > misperceptions > > > > > > > regarding the faithless. Thoughts?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > ""Minds Eye"" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]<minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
