Dennett: 'The Evolution of Confusion' - Page 4

calpurnpiso · 11-03-2009, 03:20 PM

lily wrote:

"very time Dawkins goes up against a serious theologian (McGrath, Lennox, for example) he looks like an idiot."

Hmm...you fail to see that if Dawkins would go up against a serious SCHIZOPHRENIA sufferer ( as anyone of your ancestors) he'd look like an idiot.

I agree Lily, it would be idiotic for any mentally healthy, aka atheist, scientist to go up against ANY person infected with Faith-psychosis aka theologians.

calpurnpiso · 11-03-2009, 03:24 PM

Lily wrote:

"( Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus p. 7. )"

One must first PROVE Jesus, the resurrected zombie that saves with blood, EXISTED before it can be quoted.

You'll be quoting Winnie the Poo next..

11-03-2009, 03:35 PM

Quote:

ubs wrote

He's definitely the brightest of the four horsemen, but he isn't the most aggressive. Again, I don't understand the vitriol.

What vitriol? He wrote a laughably bad book and got called on it in some highly amusing ways. Hart's review linking Dennet and hunting the Snark was simply brilliant.

ubs · 11-03-2009, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Lily wrote

What vitriol? He wrote a laughably bad book and got called on it in some highly amusing ways. Hart's review linking Dennet and hunting the Snark was simply brilliant.

You haven't read it and I doubt Hart is capable.

ubs · 11-03-2009, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Mog wrote

Too bad she's only trying to discredit Dennett using theologians. Maybe an actual scientist can explain better how his "science of religion" isn't a science of religion? I mean this David Hart isn't very convincing at all.

Giving sincere regard to something not written by a theologian is WAAAYYY too scary.

11-03-2009, 03:39 PM

Quote:

ubs wrote

You haven't read it and I doubt Hart is capable.

When you start channeling mog, you have hit rock bottom. Hart is just plain brilliant. It is a dead certainty that you have not read any of his books or his many articles. I don't think you would be able to. They are tightly reasoned and beautifully written-- something the 4 horseman could really use lessons in.

ubs · 11-03-2009, 03:43 PM

Well, anyway, thank you. Under estimation is the greatest gift you can give us.

Mog · 11-03-2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Lily wrote

When you start channeling mog, you have hit rock bottom. Hart is just plain brilliant. It is a dead certainty that you have not read any of his books or his many articles. I don't think you would be able to. They are tightly reasoned and beautifully written-- something the 4 horseman could really use lessons in.

The critical review, Lily, was all opinion and no facts. His "brilliant" and "beautifully written" prose can't cover that up, and you've demonstrated that you can't tell the difference between something that is well reasoned and something that is poorly reasoned.

nkb · 11-03-2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Lily wrote

He wrote a laughably bad book and got called on it in some highly amusing ways.

Did you read the book?

Quote:

Lily wrote

When you start channeling mog, you have hit rock bottom. Hart is just plain brilliant. It is a dead certainty that you have not read any of his books or his many articles. I don't think you would be able to. They are tightly reasoned and beautifully written-- something the 4 horseman could really use lessons in.

Have you read anything by the four horsemen?

calpurnpiso · 11-03-2009, 03:58 PM

Why is anyone comparing a mentally healthy, aka atheist, discourse; a man whose feet are firmly planted in the real world with the deluded rants of a Christ-PSychosis infected theotard like David Bentley Hart?

Doesn't anyone realizes the poor man is a THEOLOGIAN ( study of Imaginary Friends like Tooth Fairy, Jesus, Allah, Zeuss, Odin, Urantia dude, etc) a theotard whose malfunctioning brain is stuck in the past thus believing in God?

Mog · 11-03-2009, 04:04 PM

While I'm at it, I noticed Lily has a new quote!

Quote:

"Atheism that consists in vacuous arguments afloat on oceans of historical ignorance, made turbulent by storms of strident self-righteousness, is as contemptible as any other form of dreary fundamentalism."--David Hart

Now what I find ironic about this is that theism "consists of vacous arguments afloat on oceans of historical ignorance, made turbulent by storms of strident self-righteousness."
I really doubt that Judaism, Christianity, or Islam would have taken hold if we were aware of what we know now of our position in the cosmos, having evolved 4.5 billion years after the earth formed and 13.5 to 14 billion years after the universe, formed on a planet that's only one of possibly trillions of others. And unlike David Hart's claim of our being historically ignorant, in the case of religion, we definitely are sure of this historical ignorance...at a much grander scale than Hart's claim.

As for the rest, at least he didn't call us militant.

You should have stuck with your silly Kindle quote, Lily.

calpurnpiso · 11-03-2009, 04:05 PM

Does anyone needs to read a book where WINNIE THE POO is the main protagonist to know that if the author believes the characters depicted are REAL he would be reasoning like people suffering from delusions accepting neurological disorders like schizophrenia or TL epilepsy?

Why would a book like that be compared to Dawkin's "God Delusion" or Koch's " Quest for Consciousness"?

Philboid Studge · 11-03-2009, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Mog wrote

While I'm at it, I noticed Lily has a new quote!

Purple is definitely the right color for it.

calpurnpiso · 11-03-2009, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Philboid Studge wrote

Purple is definitely the right color for it.

Sure, hexaplex trunculus was used to dye clothes of the theotards in charge of the branch of the Cult of Divus Iulius in the province of judea-Palestina

11-03-2009, 08:39 PM

Quote:

ubs wrote

Well, anyway, thank you. Under estimation is the greatest gift you can give us.

You are welcome. I am so glad to finally be able to return the favor.