I have articulated this many, many times, but never yet as a full blog post, so here goes. What is it that differentiates the two major world religions, and how does this translate across to the behaviour of their adherents?
This is a pretty vital question for understanding the state of affairs with world religions and worldviews, especially in present day context…
I am having a massive debate on my facebook page at the moment with someone from the Unbelievable forum, which I have now left (tiring of the time-wasting silliness of some of the posters) about the Roman/Jewish burial practices after crucifixion with regard to Jesus’ death. Here is my latest comment on the thread:
Ok, so here is what I think. First, it is important to note that I take a sort of Bayesian approach; that being, the most plausible hypothesis should be taken to be the most likely to be true, and this involves evidence, prior probability and background knowledge.
I was listening to a Reasonable Doubts podcast from a few years ago, and it was, as ever, cracking. This one was about consciousness, its hard problem, dualism, and how it, and neuroscience, are being co-opted as a philosophical area to argue for the “God of the Gaps” style argument in the same vein as evolution in the creationist and intelligent design movements.
In debating this topic on another blog post with Geoff Roberts, I came across this book review of a book which seems to deal very much with this question. I think this review makes for a fascinating read. Let me know what you think:
This fascinating article is from ScienceDaily. It is something I have talked about before with friends, that you can tell so much about a person (or at least think you can) from a cursory look to the face. And, indeed, your brain is doing n awful lot of this non-conscious computation along those lines:
I am hoping to get my zombie book written over the remainder of the summer holidays. I have written some…
We are working, here at SIN, to offer readers of the network a range of ways of interacting with what…
Kaveh Mousavi is a blogger over at Freethought Blogs (FTB) who very kindly reviewed my Beyond An Absence of Faith book on his One the Margin of Error blog. He is an atheist living in Iran; I have a lot of respect for such courageous people. Here is his account:
I already have written a very long book as my memoir to narrate my experience as an atheist in the theocratic Iran, and its name is the same as my blog, On The Margin of Error. First I wanted to choose some various excerpts for this guest post, but ultimately decided to choose one single excerpt which chronicles my deconversion. This is in the honor of Jonathan’s (and Tristan Vick’s) book, Beyond an Absence of Faith, a book which I greatly enjoyed. Chapter three of the book is the shortest chapter, and here it is.
I am quite often asked as to whether I am a Jesus mythicist. David Fitzgerald, in that camp, kindly wrote…
Just a reminder to check us out!
The term fundamentalism is bandied about with wild abandon, but what does it really mean? We have an intuitive sense of what it means, perhaps. When I use the term, I have in my mind ideas of hardliner, fanatical beliefs, adhered to by uncompromising believers in a dogmatic insistence that a particular (holy) text and/or ideology is correct.
Our ebook, soon to be paperback, with 13 chapters contributed by authors here at SIN, is out on arious e-formats. It has received good reviews, if you discount the trolls, such as JoeG who used to hang out here on occasion, losing a $10,000 bet to Andy.
Oh bloody dear. The BBC: Astrology-loving MP seeks health answers in the stars A Conservative MP has spoken of his…
‘Rationality is useless if it is not sound. This is what Martin Luther meant when he called reason a “whore”. Pick the wrong premises, and rationality is utterly screwed. Therefore, merely that someone is “rational” means absolutely nothing about whether that person is well-connected to reality.’
Some of the writers here at SIN have contributed to an anthology called 13 Reasons to Doubt, with chapters ranging over many aspects of skepticism. Here s the description:
Extraordinary claims and extraordinary evidence.
Modern day Christians hold that Jesus and God are one. The Athanasian Creed for instance holds that “…there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost.
Metaphysical thought processes are more deeply wired than hitherto suspected
WHILE MILITANT ATHEISTS like Richard Dawkins may be convinced God doesn’t exist, God, if he is around, may be amused to find that atheists might not exist.
Cognitive scientists are becoming increasingly aware that a metaphysical outlook may be so deeply ingrained in human thought processes that it cannot be expunged.
Over at another post of mine, we have been discussing whether religion can and should be destroyed. During that conversation, the idea came up that Christians, in all probability, hold more ridiculous beliefs which are unscientific in nature; and also arose the connected idea that Christians, in a generalistic sense, are not as good at doing science, because they have a higher propensity to give up searching for answers.
I, as you may well know, contribute to the Skepticule podcast by recording a counter-apologetics segment for them, Pearced Off.…
In debating whether religion is a cause of or an excuse for violence, moral wrongdoing and problems in the world (in a discussion on facebook), it is worth noting that: