To consider antireligion instead of atheism
The harm of religion is historically evident whereas the presence or absence of gods is not. Ultimately, the continued existence of religion is predicated on the indoctrination of children and suppression of rational thought. Therefore I am against religion but not necessarily against the idea of gods. For all we know gods are computer scientists and we are in their video game. —https://www.arscyni.cc/file/antireligion.html
I disagree with you. First, not all religions are the Abrahamic variety that is the source of much of the negative rep of religion. For example you’d be very hard-pressed to find much objectionable from the Daoist camp. (You’ll find superstitious belief in the religious-Daoist camp, obviously, but far less so from the philosophical-Daoist camp.)
Second, being anti-religious doesn’t exactly have a great history itself. Communists, for example, have been anti-religious when at their most fervent and committed huge atrocities, both against religious people and against non-religious people. It seems that atheist (or, if you prefer, anti-religionist) camps haven’t exactly been clean-handed themselves. Indeed these anti-religion types (the Communists) are responsible for more death and horror than all religiously-motivated death and horror put together.²
Third, some of the most irrational people I’ve ever seen are the self-proclaimed “rationalists”. Take, for example, the entire LessWrong crowd. Though supposedly worshippers, practically, of pure reason, their output, if you dig a bit on their site, is ever-increasing gibberish with ludicrous conclusions, and the people who come out of that movement do crazy things (like the LessWrong alumni who formed that murder cult).
So I’m afraid I don’t see religion as especially deserving of ire, despite not being religious (and being atheist). Human beings are irrational at their core, and the veneer of rationality that supposed “rationalists” apply on top makes them, in the end, not that different from the religious people they sneer at.
¹ Small-a atheist, not Big-A Atheist: you know, the asshole variety like Dawkins and company.
² Now I’m not saying that anti-religionists have any kind of extra force behind things here. They just happened to be in power when the technology to do mass extinction of human life was possible. Any of the problematic religious groups would cheerfully have done the same had they had the organizational and communications technology to pull it off.
I read about one third of the way through before realizing it was Yet Another Pseudo-Intellectual (YAPI) argument that basically “carefully defines its terms” (by redefining them away from conventional meanings), then argues with a straw man. Oh, and that carefully overlooks its own counter-arguments as people who ostensibly share the writer’s stance are so carefully overlooked it practically calls attention to the absence.
You’ve introduced nothing new nor interesting to the debate about religion. You’re Hitchens without the style. You’ve got the hypocrisy of Harris, but without the personal charm. You bring nothing to the table but hollow platitudes and the typical intellectual dishonesty of the YAPI crowd.
Religion.
Atheist¹ here.
I disagree with you. First, not all religions are the Abrahamic variety that is the source of much of the negative rep of religion. For example you’d be very hard-pressed to find much objectionable from the Daoist camp. (You’ll find superstitious belief in the religious-Daoist camp, obviously, but far less so from the philosophical-Daoist camp.)
Second, being anti-religious doesn’t exactly have a great history itself. Communists, for example, have been anti-religious when at their most fervent and committed huge atrocities, both against religious people and against non-religious people. It seems that atheist (or, if you prefer, anti-religionist) camps haven’t exactly been clean-handed themselves. Indeed these anti-religion types (the Communists) are responsible for more death and horror than all religiously-motivated death and horror put together.²
Third, some of the most irrational people I’ve ever seen are the self-proclaimed “rationalists”. Take, for example, the entire LessWrong crowd. Though supposedly worshippers, practically, of pure reason, their output, if you dig a bit on their site, is ever-increasing gibberish with ludicrous conclusions, and the people who come out of that movement do crazy things (like the LessWrong alumni who formed that murder cult).
So I’m afraid I don’t see religion as especially deserving of ire, despite not being religious (and being atheist). Human beings are irrational at their core, and the veneer of rationality that supposed “rationalists” apply on top makes them, in the end, not that different from the religious people they sneer at.
¹ Small-a atheist, not Big-A Atheist: you know, the asshole variety like Dawkins and company.
² Now I’m not saying that anti-religionists have any kind of extra force behind things here. They just happened to be in power when the technology to do mass extinction of human life was possible. Any of the problematic religious groups would cheerfully have done the same had they had the organizational and communications technology to pull it off.
Before investing some time in a reply, have you read the essay that’s linked?
I read about one third of the way through before realizing it was Yet Another Pseudo-Intellectual (YAPI) argument that basically “carefully defines its terms” (by redefining them away from conventional meanings), then argues with a straw man. Oh, and that carefully overlooks its own counter-arguments as people who ostensibly share the writer’s stance are so carefully overlooked it practically calls attention to the absence.
You’ve introduced nothing new nor interesting to the debate about religion. You’re Hitchens without the style. You’ve got the hypocrisy of Harris, but without the personal charm. You bring nothing to the table but hollow platitudes and the typical intellectual dishonesty of the YAPI crowd.
Thanks for saving me the time of arguing a LLM.