New Atheism’s Fatal Arrogance

[usfan]

ok--don't like that question ? How about telling us exactly when it was finished serving it's purpose and what is it hindering now ?

It stopped serving its purpose once humanity became smart and advanced enough to think past the questions it temporarily and usually incorrectly sought to answer.

That's funny.. so you think 'humanity' is smart & advanced? Technology does not create a 'new man'. All you have is the old man with better tools.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 'old Adam' only adapts new tools, never creates a new humanity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 'old Adam' only adapts new tools, never creates a new humanity.

Humanity is brand spanking new. The amount of knowledge at our fingertips (literally) shits on the amount known by those of 2kyears ago and before.

Nope.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nope, we are what we are, and all the gadgets don't change our basic nature.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course it changed our basic nature. We went from dirty smelly hunter gather to soap, water, food is at the grocery store. Fuggoutta here our natures not different. Thats retarded.

Material infrastructure and culture is not our "basic nature" that makes us what we are.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course it changed our basic nature. We went from dirty smelly hunter gather to soap, water, food is at the grocery store. Fuggoutta here our natures not different. Thats retarded.

Material infrastructure and culture is not our "basic nature" that makes us what we are.

Your point is irrelevant. We know more now than ever, and things the ancients were ignorant of are now known rendering many if not most of the religious answers null and void.

My point is right on and you are wondering in the wilderness. You are entitled to your opinion but an authority on religion and human culture you are not.

 

[PratchettFan]

ok--don't like that question ? How about telling us exactly when it was finished serving it's purpose and what is it hindering now ?

It stopped serving its purpose once humanity became smart and advanced enough to think past the questions it temporarily and usually incorrectly sought to answer.

So...... not yet then.

 

[PratchettFan]

ok--don't like that question ? How about telling us exactly when it was finished serving it's purpose and what is it hindering now ?

It stopped serving its purpose once humanity became smart and advanced enough to think past the questions it temporarily and usually incorrectly sought to answer.

So...... not yet then.

more like well past

It must have past me. I have noticed it.

 

[usfan]

IMO, the 'new atheist's fatal arrogance' is their lack of circumspection. They think they have arrived at the pinnacle of all knowledge, as have others before them. They are too cocky, & do not have the perspective of what they do NOT know, but glory in the many things they do know. They also falsely assume that many of their BELIEFS are proven facts, when they are not even good theories.

I am talking about the 'new atheists' as described by the OP. I have known & know many reasonable, balanced atheists, who realize their knowledge of the universe is limited, & even though they do not believe, they don't push it on others, like the rabid 'new atheists' do. They are more like jehovah's witnesses.. annoyingly proselytizing their creed as though there are no alternatives. I can admire the dedication to their faith, but confidence is a poor substitute for evidence. Belief is not the same as fact.

The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. ~Eric Hoffer

 

[usfan]

Perhaps we need new terminology? We call the new conservatives 'neocons', so why not call the new atheists 'neoathes'?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Agnostics do generally think better than the atheists, but you are not the poster child for that, though.