Comments about ‘Believers and nonbelievers respond to widely read essay by 'Godless mom'’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Feb. 1 2013 1:45 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@Fred Vader – “If God doesn't exist, then it looks like science and scientists are the real cause of all the wars and suffering in the world, no?”

[Awesome last name by the way, or is it just your “dark side” moniker?]

Hmmm… no, I would say the answer is “people in general” - evolving, big-brained primates with overly large adrenal glands and a penchant for tribalism, but…
What does that have to do with anything I said?

The only assertion I made was one way of knowing (science) providing better explanations about the objective world than another way of knowing (religious or spiritual).

Is there really any argument on that count?

But to your point, yes science has given us the tools to destroy ourselves and we may yet suffer that fate, but I am far more afraid of religious fanatics (with their lust for an apocalypse) bringing that about than anyone else. For example, as bad as communism was at least it wasn’t suicidal and sure of eternal paradise after it let the missiles fly.

Reached my comment limit…

Central Texan
Buda, TX

@ Tyler D

I didn't intend for my comment to indicate that Harris only makes essentially one argument, but Harris certainly begins his Manifesto with a nuanced version of the argument I describe, writing that "the entirety of atheism" is contained in in our response to the questions of whether it is "right" or "good" for us to believe in a God who is all-powerful and all-loving, yet allows a young girl to be brutalized and killed by an abductor.

Harris wants us to assume that if God is all-powerful, he COULD intervene (to protect the little girl) if he were so inclined, and that if God is all-loving, he WOULD intervene if he could. But the logic fails in that we must first rely on the notions we have of how God WOULD behave.

Central Texan
Buda, TX

Tyler D finds the following exercise persuasive:

1.Name a scientific explanation that was later supplanted by a religious explanation.

2.Name a religious explanation that was later supplanted by a scientific one.

See which one has more.

How about this...

3.Name a scientific explanation that was later supplanted by another scientific explanation.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments