DISQUS

danielmiessler.com | grep understanding: Atheist vs. Religious Moderate Apologist: Sam Harris Debates Phillip Ball in Open Letter Format

  • cooperati · 6 months ago
    I thought you'd like it, and I thought it would be fun to send it out. (Everyone interested can subscribe to the newsletter at http://www.reasonproject.org/ .)

    Because it reasonably presents both sides of the issue, (though not from an 'apologist' perspective), I encourage EVERYONE to read it, most especially militant atheists.

    -=T=-
  • ozzy · 6 months ago
    plz do read that book I suggested. Its also serves as a mind opener.
  • CarlM · 6 months ago
    Indeed, VERY much like our conversation. Including the fact that both participants feel that the other is missing the point.

    I don't actually think that either participant .. in either discussion .. is missing the point. I simply think that there are (irreconcilable) differences of opinion of whether religion is (TODAY) a net plus or a net minus for civilization. It seems that Sam and Daniel believe that there is an enormous net minus (and both appear to be extremely frustrated that this isn't as obvious to everyone else as it is to them). It seems that Phil (like me) believes that though there are extremely damaging aspects to parts of religion, there are also aspects that are beneficial to society (and to individuals), and that it isn't so clear that the world would be better off if everyone worked to eliminate religion and religious thought.

    In any case, you may have noticed that I haven't responded to your last few posts on religion. This is because I agree wholeheartedly with Sam when he says: "In any case, I think our debate has run its course."
  • cooperati · 6 months ago
    "Including the fact that both participants feel that the other is missing the point."

    Absolutely. They purposefully ignore the important points opposing their own, specifically to pitch their own platforms.

    "It seems that Phil (like me) believes that though there are extremely damaging aspects to parts of religion, there are also aspects that are beneficial to society (and to individuals), and that it isn't so clear that the world would be better off if everyone worked to eliminate religion and religious thought."

    Too right. It's like saying we shouldn't have cars because auto-wrecks are a leading killer, or that people should become robots because cancer ruins organic bodies and lives. We can go over and over finding smaller faults with things that produce greater good.

    "In any case, you may have noticed that I haven't responded to your last few posts on religion. This is because I agree wholeheartedly with Sam when he says: 'In any case, I think our debate has run its course.'"

    Oh, yes. Some of them have been too easy to poke at.

    -=T=-