For the More Philosophically Minded
Three noteworthy items have been made available by Keith Parsons and Wes Morriston.
A Review of “Kluge: The Haphazard Evolution of the Human Mind”
Gary Marcus's book, Kluge: The Haphazard Evolution of the Human Mind
, is a body blow to religious belief. It performs a double service to us by showing how the evolution of our brain accounts for why we think so poorly, and in so doing goes a long way toward showing that religious belief is a product of this poor thinking. Very highly recommended.
Gary Marcus, professor of psychology at New York University, begins chapter one by saying: “If mankind were the product of some intelligent, compassionate designer, our thoughts would be rational, our logic impeccable. Our memory would be robust, our recollections reliable.” (p. 1). Instead, our brains evolved as a kluge. A kluge “is a clumsy or inelegant—yet surprisingly effective solution—to a problem.” Just picture a house constructed in stages by different contractors at later times and you can get the picture. The original bathroom might be extended, which in turn takes away some space from the living room, or an added bedroom which does away with the bathroom upstairs. Without starting all over with a completely new floor plan, we get a kludge
, is a body blow to religious belief. It performs a double service to us by showing how the evolution of our brain accounts for why we think so poorly, and in so doing goes a long way toward showing that religious belief is a product of this poor thinking. Very highly recommended.Gary Marcus, professor of psychology at New York University, begins chapter one by saying: “If mankind were the product of some intelligent, compassionate designer, our thoughts would be rational, our logic impeccable. Our memory would be robust, our recollections reliable.” (p. 1). Instead, our brains evolved as a kluge. A kluge “is a clumsy or inelegant—yet surprisingly effective solution—to a problem.” Just picture a house constructed in stages by different contractors at later times and you can get the picture. The original bathroom might be extended, which in turn takes away some space from the living room, or an added bedroom which does away with the bathroom upstairs. Without starting all over with a completely new floor plan, we get a kludge
Two Mormons Just Came To My Door
Does it just not cross any believer's mind that you're all ridiculous when you claim to know with certainty you're right and all others are wrong? What is it with you people? Are you just that dense? "No," you'll say, "the Mormons are wrong and we are the only ones right." Then still others will chime in: "I'm right!" "No, I am." "Am not." "Am too." Are not." "Are too." What idiocy! Do you just not realize what this looks like? Get a grip delusional people. Skepticism is the adult attitude. Grow up!
Biblical Apologetics and the Flat Earthers
Professor Keith Parsons wrote:
You know, the more I think of it, the more I think Christians--especially of the evangelical kind--argue in the same way as flat earthers. Read through that second link. See any parallels? I do.
"Without an adequate theodicy, arguing for God’s existence will be like arguing that the earth is flat. Vast quantities of contrary data will either have to be ignored or dealt with in an arbitrary and ad hoc fashion." God and the Burden of ProofThis quote came to mind today when Ed Babinski sent me two links of people who argued for a flat earth in our modern society. One of them is an article that appeared in 1931 offering $5,000 to anyone who can prove the earth is a globe. The other one is about today's flat earthers.p. 132.
You know, the more I think of it, the more I think Christians--especially of the evangelical kind--argue in the same way as flat earthers. Read through that second link. See any parallels? I do.
We’re Not As Rational As We Think, A Review of “Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior”
Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior
is wonderfully written by two brothers that highlights several areas where we humans are not as rational as we think. It has serious implications for religious believers. Let me explain.
is wonderfully written by two brothers that highlights several areas where we humans are not as rational as we think. It has serious implications for religious believers. Let me explain.Thomas Jefferson in Defense of Mockery
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." - Link
--Hat Tip: PZ Myers
--Hat Tip: PZ Myers
The Mind of the Believer
I'll tell you what, the more time I spend arguing with believers the more I become interested in psychology and how the brain works. It's not just the utter buffoons I'm talking about, which are many, but all of them. Christians are illogical and delusional. This I know, after spending years in my own delusion and after years of dealing with them since my deconversion. How can they be so deluded, I ask myself? How can they be so dumb? Recently a PhD sent me his criticisms of a part of my book, WIBA, so I began writing a response but abruptly stopped and deleted it, because it didn't deserve a response. I've heard it all before. And I've said it all before. I am convinced that defending the faith makes otherwise brilliant people look stupid. I mean it. That's what faith does to a person.
Magic and the Brain
See why magicians can trick us. This is just one of many lessons about the brain.
A Former Believer On Why He Once Believed and Then Left the Fold
See a parallel here with the Outsider Test for Faith coming from Jerry Wilson?
I realized that all religions are bubbles. People see the other bubbles, but only from a perspective within their own bubble...I realize that, from a vantage point outside of all bubbles, all bubbles are equal. So all religions are equal and, therefore, all religions are equally wrong. LinkSomeday in the future ardent Christians who visit us at DC will go through a similar deconversion just as he did, and just as I did.
Evidence of Delusion?
I am personally attacked almost every day on the web for something I've written. If I don't respond then it's taken to mean I can't (WTF?). These Christians think all skeptical arguments are utterly lame, including mine. Who in their right mind would think this? Just once I'd like to hear a devout Christian say something like: "Hey, that's something I haven't thought of before," or, "This is a serious problem for my faith." It's just that these things are almost never said. No, they have the answers. And they laugh at all skeptical arguments, many of which derive from David Hume, who is thought to be the greatest English speaking philosopher who ever lived.
Now it's one thing to disagree with the skeptics. It's another thing entirely to think our arguments have no force at all. The fact that most Christians think they have no force at all simply means these Christians are delusional.
Now it's one thing to disagree with the skeptics. It's another thing entirely to think our arguments have no force at all. The fact that most Christians think they have no force at all simply means these Christians are delusional.
The Goal of My Book Was to Overwhelm the Believer
A few Christians and skeptics have criticized my book WIBA because in it I quote from many different sources to make my points for me. Let me explain why I did this and see if it makes sense.
“The Human Faces of God” by Thom Stark, Should be Required Reading in Every Evangelical Seminary, Bar None
This is my conclusion from reading this book by Thom Stark. It’s an absolute must read that I’ve included in my Debunking Christianity Challenge. I'll share a few criticisms of it but they pale by comparison with the over-all thrust of his powerful book. He comes from the same centrist Christian Church that I did, which is also noteworthy. Let me give you a brief overview of it.
I Still Want a Respectful Educated Discussion of the Ideas That Separate Us
Have I changed my attitude from wanting a respectful discussion of the issues that divide us? If so, why? Have believers changed me? Should I let them change me? Will they be better off if they do?...or worse off? Can I remain steadfast in hopes of the ideal in the midst of some utterly ignorant comments and personal attacks from people I think are delusional? Am I that kind of person? Should I even care?
Once again Victor Reppert has taken a pot shot at me. He has become somewhat fixated on me. I guess that's a compliment since he wouldn't do this if I was not a threat to his faith. And while I don't respond to many criticisms posted by Christian Bloggers I do feel the need to respond to him, which is a compliment to him as well. Should I bother responding?
Once again Victor Reppert has taken a pot shot at me. He has become somewhat fixated on me. I guess that's a compliment since he wouldn't do this if I was not a threat to his faith. And while I don't respond to many criticisms posted by Christian Bloggers I do feel the need to respond to him, which is a compliment to him as well. Should I bother responding?
Quote of the Day, by Paula Kirby in the Washington Post
Religion claims to set its followers free, while all the time holding them in thrall and insisting they kiss the hand of their jailer. There can be no true freedom so long as religion still keeps the human mind in shackles. Link
Ed Babinski on the Flat Earth Myth
It's true that Columbus and most Church Fathers were not flat earthers, but don't start cheering just yet. . . Enjoy.
Books That Explain Why There is Religion
If you are seriously interested in knowing the real basis for belief you should read one of more of the following excellent books.
How Do You Know That Which You Claim to Know?
Anyone who understands the slightest bit of epistemology knows enough not to claim he or she knows too much with any degree of assuredness. Doubt about what we claim to know is a virtue. This is one of the reasons I doubt the Christian claims. Most Christians claim to know what they believe with complete assuredness. Just read their comments here at DC. I have repeatedly made the distinction between claiming to know something and doubting someone's claims. I simply doubt the Christian claims, and the following books could give Christians an insight into why this is reasonable to do...
The Problem of Miracles
[Written by John W. Loftus] I can think of at least seven problems with believing in the biblical claims of miracles.
Quote of the Day on the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF)
There is an entry on the Outsiders Test at Iron Chariots. Here's the dilemma it presents for believers:
On the one hand, believers who object to the OTF look like a person who argues in a court room that he does not want a fair impartial judgment, but rather a biased one from a biased judge who operates on double standards.
On the other hand, believers who accept the rationale for the OTF have a great amount of difficulty in arguing that the raw uninterpreted historical data without any culturally adopted Bayesian "priors" leads the historian to the conclusion that Jesus bodily arose from the dead.
Vote For "The Christian Delusion" as the Best Atheist Book of 2010
My anthology, The Christian Delusion
, has been nominated for the best atheist book in 2010. Please cast your vote right here. If you think it's deserving I'd really appreciate your vote.
, has been nominated for the best atheist book in 2010. Please cast your vote right here. If you think it's deserving I'd really appreciate your vote.Okay I Confess, I've Been Over at Victor Reppert's Blog Again *Slap*
Somehow I just can't seem to stay away ;-)
Another Failed Attempt to Disabuse Me of the Outsider Test for Faith
David Marshall's latest critique of the OTF confuses the success of a particular religion with passing the OTF, which, if correct, would make contradictory religions true by virtue of being successful. And he falsely assumes there is one brand of Christianity. Hence this is no critique of the test at all. He raises some issues that need to be addressed, but that's all. The issues he raises are addressed by Richard Carrier in chapter two of my forthcoming anthology, The End of Christianity, titled "Christianity's Success Was Not Incredible." And I've already explained why Secular Humanism (or atheism) can't win (or be successful).
Quote of the Day
For a religious faith to pass the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) it must be justified by the sciences. Period. If believers reject the sciences as a way to know the truth then let them propose a better alternative. So if the OTF is to be rejected, what do we put in its place? What’s the alternative?
My Cousin Pastor Jeff Stackhouse, a Calvinist, is Cornered on God Being the Author of Sin
Yep, this is him. Wow, such contorted logic knows no bounds:
Am I Crazy? Are You? A Review of Dr. Randal Rauser's New Book
Randal's new book You’re Not As Crazy As I Think: Dialogue in a World of Loud Voices and Hardened Opinions
is refreshing in several ways as a reminder that we need more dialogue between opposing sides, rather than more vitriol.
is refreshing in several ways as a reminder that we need more dialogue between opposing sides, rather than more vitriol. Take College Classes Through the Online CFI Institute
You can read about the CFI Institute run by Dr. John Shook right here. Starting in March, Dr. Richard Carrier will be teaching a class on Naturalism. I'll be teaching one soon, perhaps in April. Other professors include Robert M. Price, Susan Jacoby, Nica Lalli, Dale McGowan, and others. Check it out.
I've Scheduled Some Posts While I'm Gone
I'll be back Thursday night from speaking on Darwin Day for two skeptical groups. Your group might consider having me speak, or for a debate. See ya Friday or so. Until then enjoy my scheduled posts.
Five Deceptive Apologetic Strategies
[Written by John W. Loftus] The social sciences (which broadly speaking includes psychology) have shown us that people hold to unrecognized contradictory beliefs and that they can deceive themselves to accept their conscious beliefs despite the evidence. People have asked me from time to time if Christian apologists lie to defend their faith and I have repeatedly said that even though there are some Christians who do so, most Christian apologists are sincere believers. I still think that. But what's really going on is that these Christian defenders have become experts at deceiving themselves first. They are therefore deceiving others because they are deceiving themselves.
My task is to show them this is what they're doing. It's very hard to convince the deceived that they are deceiving themselves though. They don’t take too kindly to my doing so. They use several deceptive apologetics strategies and they use them all really well. The following apologetic strategies are used by defenders of the Christian faith to deceive. They are used to convince themselves against the evidence. They are used to convince others to embrace Christianity. Don't buy into their spiel.
My task is to show them this is what they're doing. It's very hard to convince the deceived that they are deceiving themselves though. They don’t take too kindly to my doing so. They use several deceptive apologetics strategies and they use them all really well. The following apologetic strategies are used by defenders of the Christian faith to deceive. They are used to convince themselves against the evidence. They are used to convince others to embrace Christianity. Don't buy into their spiel.
Calvinism is Bullshit, and God Wanted Me to Say This.
The Gloves are Off Now! Slavery? NO, A Thousand Times NO!
I've had enough. I am sick and tired of Christian intellectuals, from Paul Copan (my friend), to Victor Reppert and a lot lower down the totem pole to David Wood, in their attempts to say that the slavery in the American South was different than what the Bible allows, and so it should never have been used to justify it. If you want to see me hot tempered, then just raise this asinine argument. I try to get along here at DC by being respectful of Christian beliefs, but on this issue I cannot bend for one nanosecond. Don't even suggest it, as Dr. Victor Reppert just did. Here's what I wrote in response:
Frederick Douglass, a Secularist?
Yep, as Dr. Hector Avalos informs us in his latest column for The Tribune.
Closer to the Truth Looks at the Big Questions
Navigate around at Closer to the Truth. There are some very interesting videos on a number of different topics by top notch philosophers, scientists and apologists, and they keep adding to it. You could spend hours and hours there. There are many hours of videos about the God question too. Let me know which ones you find interesting.
First posted on 10/18/08
First posted on 10/18/08
Professor Matt McCormick Proposes "The Defeasibility Test"
So in the spirit of John Loftus’ Outside Test for Faith, I propose a test. Before I or any other doubter, atheist, skeptic, or non-believer engages in a discussion about the reasons for and against God, the believer must look deep into his heart and mind and ask this question: Are there any considerations, arguments, evidence, or reasons, even hypothetically that could possibly lead me to change my mind about God? Is it even a remotely possible outcome that in carefully and thoughtfully reflecting on the broadest and most even body of evidence that I can grasp, that I would come to think that my current view about God is mistaken? That is to say, is my belief defeasible?
If the answer is no, then we’re done. There is nothing informative, constructive, or interesting to be found in your contribution to dialogue. Anything you have to say amounts to sophistry. We can’t take your input any more seriously than the lawyer who is a master of casuistry and who can provide rhetorically masterful defenses of every side of an issue. She’s not interested in the truth, only is scoring debate points or the construction of elaborate rhetorical castles (that float on air). Read more.
Answering Once and For All The Christian Complaint That Skeptics Would Refuse to Believe No Matter What God Did
This objection comes in several different forms. Christians complain that skeptics demand that God should make his existence obvious to us with undeniable proof before we will believe, or that God should make all religious diversity disappear, or that we wouldn’t believe no matter what miracle God did before our eyes. Some atheists have even said as much, including PZ Myers, who recently said he would seriously consider that he had gone mad rather than believe a miracle had happened before his eyes.
The Christian then shoots his double barrel shotgun at us: 1) If we wouldn’t believe should God’s existence be obvious, then why would God bother providing more evidence in the first place? We simply have hardened hearts. If the present amount of evidence will not convince us then no amount of evidence will convince us at all. 2) If God’s existence was made to be obvious then it would eliminate the possibility of real choice, for it would equally be obvious what we ought to do. And if we would know what God requires of us and that we’d be punished if we disobey then “who but a complete fool would not do what is right?” Let me respond once and for all.
The Christian then shoots his double barrel shotgun at us: 1) If we wouldn’t believe should God’s existence be obvious, then why would God bother providing more evidence in the first place? We simply have hardened hearts. If the present amount of evidence will not convince us then no amount of evidence will convince us at all. 2) If God’s existence was made to be obvious then it would eliminate the possibility of real choice, for it would equally be obvious what we ought to do. And if we would know what God requires of us and that we’d be punished if we disobey then “who but a complete fool would not do what is right?” Let me respond once and for all.
Such Idiocy: I Do Defend My Views Against the Opposition
There are several blog posts in criticism of what I've written that I have not attempted to answer. Because I choose not to do so the accusation is leveled at me that I don't interact with the opposition. This is such idiocy that no wonder these people believe. Let me explain.
Quote of the Day
Christianity is not a worldview. A worldview is larger than one's religious beliefs. It encompasses everything a person accepts as true. So there are probably as many worldviews as there are people.
Austin Cline's Readers' Choice Awards
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Book of 2010Hey, didn't I publish an anthology in 2010? ;-) If you think The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Blog
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Podcast
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Website
* Best Agnostic or Atheist to Follow on Twitter
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Facebook Page
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Social Networking Website
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Forum
* Best Agnostic or Atheist Ad
is a worthy one then I'd appreciate your nomination. It's Easy to Convert People to Christianity!
This 13 minute cartoon video is very instructive, although a bit boring. It's the kind of stuff that converts people to Christianity within a Christian culture. [Warning: Watch it at your own risk! You may convert! lol] This is all you need to do to convert people. Tell a person who is in need a nice tear jerking story. It's easy!
Open Mike Day
Share some thoughts and links here. Then discuss them all you want to. I'm preparing for a couple of talks in the Los Angeles area. Keep me in mind for any upcoming events.
"Don't Spank That Monkey" App Courtesy of XXX Church ;-)
Such a guilt producing message! Okay, Okay, sexual addictions can be very serious, but WTF is this! What's wrong with masturbation? Anyone? Anyone? Will it make you go blind or something? And what's wrong with lust? It's biology baby. Christians will forever have problems with sex. They don't know what to do with it except deny, deny, deny. I've written about this before.
Quote of the Day
Given the proliferation of religious delusions that seem to be growing around the globe in an age of weapons of mass destruction, atheists must start breeding like rabbits. ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)