HolyLasagna's messages

Hey, it’s okay dude. The important thing is that you are able to apologize when you realize that you may be wrong – this makes you bigger than most other men.

Remember that Einstein did not like the term “atheist” because he thought it meant “negate the existence of God”, which is a presumptuous position. You can’t prove a negative. So he believed in something he called the “Spinoza God”, which is in no way a personal God (he said the notion of a personal God is alien to him and naive) – it’s kind of a pantheistic view that means he is in awe with how marvelous nature is. By our current definition, he’s an atheist – one that does not believe in a personal God.

Some New Atheists, like those on Facebook or Reddit, usually only post witty remarks parodying religion – it’s an easy target. However, the big New Atheists tackle deeply difficult questions. They deserve much more credit than you give them. Harris, Dennett, Myers, Stenger, Shermer, Dawkins, Stenger, Hitchens, Pinker… all those are highly qualified scientists and philosophers that tackle the most difficult questions of our time while debating religion and other subjects. It goes far, far beyond talking about Russell’s Teapot or the Spaghetti Monster. Those are valid and used, as they show how irrational some pious rationalizations can become, but are only a small part of the whole debate.

About Harris’s book, The Moral Landscape, I have not read it yet. It seems to be interesting! IIRC he makes a good case arguing that our morality – that is, our codes of behavior that aim to maximize everyone’s well-being – can be derived from and developed within the framework of science and philosophy, since it has proven to be a much better source of knowledge than anything of religious nature. If I remember to do so, I’ll tell you what I thought about the book when I finish reading it! It’s in my Amazon list.

One more thing: Check out some militant atheist bloggers and YouTubers if you like… you’re bound to find some brilliant humans, be it RationalWiki, TalkOrigins, QualiaSoup, or the Dawkins website. NA spokespersons tend to be extremely well-read and intelligent – which is why I thought it was so weird that you were hating on NA.