Dawkins presents very broad brush strokes to tar a subject he does not define.
Einstein's atheist use of religion is not the same has other religious views. I, as an atheist, am instead misguided - an honorary theist.
They may not believe but, to borrow Dan Dennett's phrase, they "believe in belief".
We see that religious people are delusional. A word with some important psychological connotations, but there is no background for how accurate this medical term is applied in the way Dawkins applies it. Instead we are to take it on faith. For some reason, being honorarily delusional makes me a whole lot less interested in being sympathetic.
Delusional Disorder Delusional disorder refers to a condition associated with one or more nonbizarre delusions of thinking--such as expressing beliefs that occur in real life such as being followed, being poisoned, being loved or deceived, or having an illness, provided no other symptoms of schizophrenia are exhibited. Delusions may seem believable at face value, and patients may appear normal as long as an outsider does not touch upon their delusional themes.
Delusional disorder refers to a condition associated with one or more nonbizarre delusions of thinking--such as expressing beliefs that occur in real life such as being followed, being poisoned, being loved or deceived, or having an illness, provided no other symptoms of schizophrenia are exhibited.
Delusions may seem believable at face value, and patients may appear normal as long as an outsider does not touch upon their delusional themes.
Treatment Treatment approaches may be found similar to those used to treat symptoms of schizophrenia. Antipsychotic drugs are often very effective in treating delusions. A number of new antipsychotic drugs (the so-called "atypical antipsychotics") have been introduced since 1990. The first of these, clozapine (Clozaril), has been shown to be more effective than other antipsychotics, although the possibility of severe side effects--in particular, a condition called agranulocytosis (loss of the white blood cells that fight infection)--requires that patients be monitored with blood tests every one or two weeks. Even newer antipsychotic drugs, such as risperidone (Risperdal) and olanzapine (Zyprexa), are safer than the older drugs or clozapine, and they also may be better tolerated. They may or may not treat the illness as well as clozapine, however. Several additional antipsychotics are currently under development.
Treatment approaches may be found similar to those used to treat symptoms of schizophrenia. Antipsychotic drugs are often very effective in treating delusions. A number of new antipsychotic drugs (the so-called "atypical antipsychotics") have been introduced since 1990. The first of these, clozapine (Clozaril), has been shown to be more effective than other antipsychotics, although the possibility of severe side effects--in particular, a condition called agranulocytosis (loss of the white blood cells that fight infection)--requires that patients be monitored with blood tests every one or two weeks. Even newer antipsychotic drugs, such as risperidone (Risperdal) and olanzapine (Zyprexa), are safer than the older drugs or clozapine, and they also may be better tolerated. They may or may not treat the illness as well as clozapine, however. Several additional antipsychotics are currently under development.
May I also suggest ECT?
We are meant to be impressed with the evils of religion and regaled with the Battle of Jericho. Alternative explanations are not listed. Einstein said
Nationalism is an infantile disease.
In spite of the very serious failure to address his terms there are issues that he raises that need to be raised and talked about. Unfortunately he takes a subject that initially is highly charged emotionally and makes it even more highly charged. And then there is Hitchens. Am I suppose to have any sympathy for the views of this man?
Well I stared off with a sympathetic mind on the smearing of Dawkins. I was less open to some of Dawkins arguments. Some of his arguemts I think are interesting and under some circumstances would be interesting to debate. Did nanne go overbord? I still don't have enough information to form an opinion. On the other hand the defense of Dawkins so far is none to pretty either. And then there is Hitchens.
There is a reason why I have gone towards organized religious pacifists to discover more about who i am as an atheist. While Millman may be fighting a war, at least they are not. Unlike nanne - I lasted about a week with internet atheists.
aspiring to genteel poverty
Tao Te Ching - Peter Merel's Interpolation
32. Shapes The Way has no true shape, And therefore none can control it. If a ruler could control the Way All things would follow In harmony with his desire, And sweet rain would fall, Effortlessly slaking every thirst. The Way is shaped by use, But then the shape is lost. Do not hold fast to shapes But let sensation flow into the world As a river courses down to the sea.
The Way has no true shape, And therefore none can control it. If a ruler could control the Way All things would follow In harmony with his desire, And sweet rain would fall, Effortlessly slaking every thirst. The Way is shaped by use, But then the shape is lost. Do not hold fast to shapes But let sensation flow into the world As a river courses down to the sea.
For someone whose declared goal (in so many - although slightly different - words) is to shift the Overton window, Dawkins has been unusually mellow and academic-sounding in all the cases I'm familiar with (which admittedly isn't all that many, though). Yet judging by the things people write about him here and elsewhere, you'd expect him to have enough fire and brimstone to set up a Hell of his own.
I'm not going to compare him to the rabid attack dogs of the Rightwing Noise Machine, but FFS, Al Franken and Steve Colbert regularly outdoes him on the venom and vitriol front. Yet those are rarely if ever attacked in Left Blogistan. And let's not even mention Michael Moore, who makes all three of them look like paragons of Aristotelian inquiry by comparison. (FWIW, I found Fahrenheit 9/11 obnoxious, but I rather liked Dude, Where's my Country.)
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
Of course Al Franklin is not trying to engage in any sort of meaningful dialog with Republicans as far as I can tell. Is Dawkins trying for some sort of dialog? If so, then we had better use a different standard.
Precisely what Dawkins considers his mission to be, I do not know. I don't follow him that closely, because frankly there are authors that I consider more worth my time. He has stated, however, (or it's been attributed to him - I can't off-hand recall which) that he desires to strip away the unearned respect accorded religion simply because it is religion. Given this goal - which by the way I consider laudable - his tactics make a lot of sense. Given most of the other goals he has stated and/or been attributed... well, not so much. But then again, you can't do everything at once.
