Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Reading this summer
KharBevNor:
And when was the last time you personally participated in an academic level debate on religious philosophy?
Tom:
--- Quote from: Jimmy the Squid on 08 Jun 2008, 00:30 ---Well, it's Winter here but I just borrowed the 8 books of the Dresden Files by Jim Butcher from Est. I've read the first one and they are really pleasently written detective novels about a wizard. I am so down with the noir-ish style that Butcher is good at that I'm really excited to read the rest of them (I have two months of holidays starting last week). I'm also going to borrow my friend's copy of Psychopathia Sexualis by Richard Von Kraftt-Ebbing which is, though outdated, meant to be fascinating.
--- End quote ---
Those both sound very interesting.
Jimmy the Squid:
I've been participating in academic debates, though not official ones, on religion for the last 6 months or so and I'm pretty glad I'm such a Dawkins' fanboy.
Obviously I quite like The God Delusion but not just because I agree with (almost) everything it says but also because I think it's a book that needed to be written. Religion is something that everyone tip-toes around for no reason other than that they're afraid of offending someone who believes things that are a little silly. When you live in a world where things like Creationism and Abstinence-Only sex ed. are being taught in government funded schools, where government officials, the people with actual power, are naiive enough to believe the universe is only 6,000 years old, it is important that there are voices of reason out there that people can turn to.
Yeah The God Delusion is intentionally contraversial, but I wouldn't call them ignorant. And I'm not claiming to be an expert on anything here, I go out of my way not to read Christian apologetics because I am really not interested in what they have to say. I just feel that Dawkins' work is important and really very interesting, especially given that his writing style is really straightforward and conversational.
In the same vein I highly recommend Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris and Atheist Universe by David Mills.
Jackie Blue:
--- Quote from: Jimmy the Squid on 08 Jun 2008, 02:04 ---Yeah The God Delusion is intentionally contraversial, but I wouldn't call them ignorant. And I'm not claiming to be an expert on anything here, I go out of my way not to read Christian apologetics
--- End quote ---
Did you even read the article I linked? It is not written from a standpoint that Christianity, or any religion, is "right". It simply points out very effectively that Dawkins' concept of religion is factually inaccurate, that his perception of God is exactly the same as boorish Evangelicals and the only difference is that he doesn't like the concept and they do. Dawkins has nothing to say about real theology and it is fairly apparent the reason is that he has no knowledge of real theology. His brand of utilitarian worldview is about as laughably po-faced as Ayn Rand's and, I suspect, would make Buddha himself LOL.
"Oh what fools these mortals be."
Jimmy the Squid:
Well it's not as if he is writing for academics or theologists (the most worthless field of study in my own worthless opinion). He's writing for the average guy on the street, the average Christian who can't name all 12 of the apostles or who don't know who Moses was but swear blind that they know it all anyway. If his perception of God is the same as the boorish Televangelists it is because that is the perception of God that he is arguing against. The God Delusion comes with a preface that quite baldly states that only extreme, fundemental religion is really being addressed (though I grant you that his arguments can be extrapolated onto moderate religion as well, though that may or may not be a good idea).
I suppose his books are not up to your high standards and so if you don't want to read them don't. The reason he is so vitriolic is because more attention is likely to be paid to a book like that than a more softly spoken one. I'm sure it's very noble to keep a cool head when your opponent is shouting so loud his face is purple and his veins are bulging to the point of bursting but you won't make yourself heard.
On the other hand, if you've ever seen Dawkins actually debate his point it is in quite a civilised and calm manner (which is exactly the advice given most often on the dawkinsforum, of which I am an active member) so it's possible that you're reading things out of context and getting the wrong end of the stick.
If you're telling us we shouldn't read a book because you've read it and you thought it wasn't any good (for whatever reason) then great, we might take it into consideration, but, and I don't know about anyone else, I pay little attention to critics so if all you have to provide against the book is someone else's opinion (an opinion that is in a minority given the amount of acolades the book has gotten Dawkins) then I doubt your words will have that much of an effect really.
--- Quote from: n0t_r0bert_b0yle!! on 08 Jun 2008, 01:54 ---Those both sound very interesting.
--- End quote ---
They are, Psychopathia Sexualis is basically an attempt to categorise sexual "deviances" and disorders both psychologically and neurologically. I flicked through it a bit last week and it looks pretty good. As I said it is a bit out dated (being written in 1904 it still classifies homosexuality as a disorder and any, non vaginal sex as a deviation but for things like fetishes and paraphilias it's meant to be quite good) but fascinating if, like me, you're interested in the psychology behind sexuality.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version