Why we need extreme atheism

[jack_ryder]

for dfordoom

(because it supports his case)

Comments

[gillpolack.livejournal.com]

I'm refraining from adding to the comments on your earlier post, because I rather suspect I could become inflammatory over someone's assumptions that all forms of belief in deity are the same and somewhat Christian and an impossible fit with rational belief. Also I could get heavily into science history and its relationship with formal religion. Two hundred years ago *not* believing in God could get scientists sacked from certain universities (why Galileo's observations were so controversial - they left no place in the new cosmos for God to physically reside). Does this mean that the only really rational humans were born rather recently? Drabbit, I was *so* not going to rant today!

Now I'm wondering whether atheists share as much world view as tehy think. Surely it's not a reaction to the religious beliefs of others, but a set of fully articulated understandings of the world independent of that. How do two atheists know that they actually share the same structure in their lack of belief? Dawkins has brought this out into the open by articulating a specific approach to atheism (one intolerant of stuff he doesn't like?), but I bet there is not one 'atheism' just as there isn't one 'religion.' I love the diversity of humans :).

[gillpolack.livejournal.com]

The other thing is that for some atheists it might be a lack of belief (which just shows where I come from - only someone brought up religious can talk about it as a 'lack') but for most it's probably a complete world view, not lacking in anything. Sigh. We all have our problems - at least I've realised this one of mine and can address it. In future, I promise not to assume that atheists are lacking anything without clear proof.

[jack-ryder.livejournal.com]

not even tact?

;)

[gillpolack.livejournal.com]

Clear proof of lack of tact is easy enough to get.