I do think it should be promoted by some, rather than actively discouraged and making one a target of hate and prejudice. If it follows humanistic secular views, moderately as OM points out, it should have little harm and could be a great benefit to some. Atheism (or agnosticism) don't need to be promoted really in large scale or officially. People discover it, and if they take the time to understand a little they might take it or leave it, hopefully a more aware person either way.
These things are all just exercises for the mind anyway, what is- is (whatever that may be). Most of the time I cannot swallow the divine creation concept either, other times I see a little wiggle room in animism or some radical form of pantheism, and at times I am very 'spiritual' (romantic, subjective, whatever). It's all mood and diet to me. A roll your own, homegrown. Maybe we should promote that (maybe that too Tao)! *chuckles On Friday, April 8, 2011 12:37:08 AM UTC-4, malcymo wrote: > > Yes. Militant anything is frightful isn't it? > > So now we get to the question of when is militant action valid? > > I hope you have time to get hold of a copy of Grayling's book. > > I would like to hear more on the subject. > > Malc > > > On Apr 7, 11:19 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > First, thank you Malcolm for referencing this book! I hadn’t heard > > about it yet. > > > > As to your question(s)…Grayling and numerous others…for a long time > > now have had ‘an argument for the active promotion of atheism’. So, > > since this is nothing new…I’m not sure that it should be taken as > > such. And, following your wording, even allowing a quick fantasy of > > militant evangelical atheist is fraught with the same horror of > > militant evangelical theists! > > > > In any sense…to give any debate about such activities, specifics will > > have to be presented and I just have not read the book…although I have > > heard him and his ilk talk. Here is one recent interview: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNCc336QgUQ > > > > His deification of rationalism seems to be at the center of his thesis… > > and for the purpose of our debate here and now, I’ll say that such a > > stance is but an act of polarization and dialectics with a result of a > > stance that is not integrated. > > > > There is nothing ‘wrong’ with ideation as there is nothing ‘wrong’ > > with knowledge when the subjectivity of words and concepts is not > > addressed. > > > > On Apr 7, 3:18 am, malcymo <[email protected]> wrote:> I do not believe > that a supreme being created the universe etc. > > > > > Until today, I have accepted the existence of religions on the > > > grounds > > > that they give hope and faith to many in the face of adversity and > > > promote certain moral values. > > > > > This week A C Grayling brought out his book "The Good Book - A > > > secular > > > bible". In interview he stated that theism is harmful to individuals > > > and society. Although his thoughts on this were nor expanded. > > > > > I live in Fiji and cannot get a copy of his book but I would like to > > > hear his argument on this matter. Ie Why he thinks that theism is > > > harmful. > > > > > I have found nothing of depth on the web. > > > > > If he is indeed correct then there is an argument for the active > > > promotion of atheism. Perhaps we can become missionaries in the human > > > cause. > > > > > What say you?
