Fencesitter

You know what someone else meant to say? Wow.

nixon

Only problem with that theory was the most fundy movement of all time - the inquisition existed in a time of almost no secularism or disent from the church. A lot of people think the slippery slope arguement is flawed, but when it comes to people who want to force their beliefs on others, it is ALWAYS give an inch - they take a mile.

fatpie42

I'd echoe those sentiments. As you could tell from my rubbish explanation, I have never really understood the idea of fundamentalism as a response to secularism. There are people in my university's theology department who seem to blame secularism for everything. The whole idea strikes me as odd.

Adora

And a theology department isn't necessarily the best place to get objective opinions on secularism from, now is it? Which is why I took the description mostly from the historical studies done on the phenomenon I've read by non-theologians, trying vainly to insert a little objectivity into the discussion.

And if you can't yourself tell the difference between "blaming" something for a reactionary movement and "explaining" something as the thing the movement is reacting to, you're no better than the theologians you decry.

fatpie42

Well it didn't sound like they were simply explaining it as the something the fundamentalists were reacting to. It actually sounded like they were claiming that the whole of society is doomed because of secularism. That is what I call 'blaming'.

Oolon Colluphid

Please could you define "self publicity" as you are using it, and then point me towards some examples of it from Dawkins. I seem to have missed it.

Oolon Colluphid

And if I say that a creationist is an ignoramus, I am militant, aggressive and pushy too.

In which case: :jump:

Xrikcus

Self publicity was completely the wrong phrase. He is getting himself around increasingly and courting the idea that he is very anti-religion in such a way as to attract attention.


I don't think that's true. How is that any more militant than saying in a religious setting "those who don't believe in the Truth will go to hell"? It's just an opinion, and one many people would agree with.

Helpmabob

I say he's done well to get a one-sided diatribe on prime time telly. But put him in a studio with a born-again christian, and the contrast between the two is striking. I think it is the obvious peace of the christian vs. the subverted foundationlessness of Dawkins that is coming into play.

Oolon Colluphid

Examples?