Jobar

seebs, and all- if you think that atheists have trouble with theology, I urge you to come to EoG and try theological conclusions with Thomas Metcalf, or bd-from-kg, or me for that matter. For more than a few of us, theology *is* the reason we are atheists.

brighid

Maybe I am misinterpreting things, but I came away with the impression that some atheists have a hard time understanding theology, just as some Christians have a hard time understanding science and that was not necessarily dependent on one's theism or lack thereof ... maybe it would be better stated that some people, who happen to be atheists, have a difficult time understanding theology AND some people, who happen to be Christian, have a difficult time understanding science.

As an atheist, I can say that some theology and some science are very difficult for me to understand. However, it has nothing to do with my lack of belief, but rather a knowledge gap and possibly even a brain, wiring issue that makes some concepts more difficult to grasp.

Brighid

livius drusus

That describes my experience as well. I absolutely reek at philosophy, in fact. I simply cannot retain the concept I'm exploring and am constantly having to reread the first part of the sentence to understand the second, then I promptly forget both parts. I have the same disability when reading about the Theory of Relativity. I understand what I'm reading for about 10 seconds and but as soon as I look away I just lose my intellectual grip on the subject matter.

I suspect the same would hold true if I were the most devout CoC literalist. Disbelief and lack of comprehension are two entirely different things.

brighid

That describes me in a nutshell. I have tried very hard to digest the Theory of Relativity, but for whatever reason, I have an easier time understanding Japanese (which I have VERY little background in.)

Oh, and I agree that Richard Dawkins is one very fine man!

Brighid

Gurdur

I once got Dawkin's email address from an academic colleague; I was warned to be careful, since Dawkins can be very irascible and difficult to get along with.

Steven Jay Gould may not have been as great a thinker possibly, but he seemed easier to get on with.

Steven Pinker (The Language Instinct et al) has great hair, according to several of my female academic colleagues, one of whom at least was bitterly disappointed to find out Pinker already had a girlfriend.
Since Pinker's ideas were hardly new (an NZ prof of linguistics beat him to the punch by a year or more), I've often reflected scientific revolutionary changes of paradigm rely much more on hair-do's than is known.

brighid

He seems like he could be difficult to get along with, however my claims that he is hot is purely physical The man takes a good picture!

Brighid

Gurdur

See ?

Feyerabend et al were wrong. It's all in the hair-do.

brighid

Ah quite possibly, although I do find a cleanly shaven head to be VERY sexy!

B

Gurdur

You'll have all the anti-circumcision zealots coming down like a ton of bricks on you for that comment.

Heathen Dawn

I sent Dawkins an e-mail a few weeks ago, notifying him that I had translated two articles of his to Hebrew (Religion’s Misguided Missiles, and Good and Bad Reasons for Believing). He was very nice. He even asked me how life was for me as an Orthodox Jew and why I left the religion.

As for theology, I find it a house built upon a foundation of air: so much stuff about God, without ever having established that He actually exists. And so many convictions that run contrary to experience, for example, that the universe is governed by love and mercy although all clear observation runs counter to that. Dawkins is my favorite anti-theologian. His quotes about the blind, pitiless indifference of the universe are the only metaphysical philosophy that makes sense.