Debate
‘The God Fraud’ by Sam Harris
© Sam Harris:
In her article (“Think Again: God,” November 2009), Karen Armstrong discovers that Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and I have mistaken “fundamentalism” for the totality of religion. (Sorry about that.) But do Richard and Christopher really hold religion responsible for “all human cruelty”? That is a surprise. I hadn’t realized that they were idiots.
In any case, I am hopeful that Armstrong’s winsome depiction of Islam will shame and enlighten them, as it has me. They will discover that Hassan al-Banna and Tariq Ramadan are paragons of meliorism and wisdom, while we are ignorant bigots who know nothing of theology (of course), politics (Christopher, are you listening?), human nature (what’s to know?), or the proper limits of science (um … narrower?).
I can’t quite remember how we got it into our heads that jihad was linked to violence. (Might it have had something to do with the actual history and teachings of Islam?) And how could we have been so foolish as to connect the apparently inexhaustible supply of martyrs in the Muslim world to the Islamic doctrine of martyrdom? In my own defense, let me say that I do get spooked whenever Western Muslims advocate the murder of apostates (as 36 percent of Muslim young adults do in Britain). But I now know that these freedom-loving people just “want to see God reflected more clearly in public life.”
I will call my friend Ayaan Hirsi Ali at once and encourage her to come out of hiding: Come on out, dear. Karen says the coast is clear. As it turns out, those people who have been calling for your murder don’t understand Islam any better than we do.
Continue reading at SamHarris.org
Karen Armstrong replies:
It is clear that we need a debate about the role of religion in public life and the relationship between science and religion. I just wish this debate could be conducted in a more Socratic manner. Socrates, founder of the Western rationalist tradition, always insisted that any dialogue must be conducted with gentleness and courtesy, and without malice. In our highly polarized world, we really do not need yet another deliberately contentious and divisive discourse.
When I was a student, I was taught to listen to all sides of a question, examine the evidence impartially, and be prepared to change my mind. For many years, I wanted nothing to do with religion and would have agreed wholeheartedly with Sam Harris; my early writing definitely tended to the Dawkinsesque. But my study of the history of world religion during the past 20 years has compelled me to alter my views.
Continue reading at SamHarris.org
—–
Moderate Islam: Western Ally or Western Myth?
© FORA TV.
The Middle East Forum:
- Contributors Biographies:
Daniel Pipes – Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and a prize-winning columnist who writes for the New York Times Syndicate. His website, DanielPipes.org, is one of the most accessed internet sources of specialized information on the Middle East and Islam.
The Wall Street Journal calls Mr Pipes “an authoritative commentator on the Middle East.” CBS Sunday Morning says he was “years ahead of the curve in identifying the threat of radical Islam.”
For example, Pipes wrote in 1995, “Unnoticed by most Westerners, war has been unilaterally declared on Europe and the United States.” The Boston Globe states that “If Pipes’s admonitions had been heeded, there might never have been a 9/11.”
Pipes received his AB (1971) and PhD (1978) in History from Harvard University and spent six years studying abroad, including three years in Egypt. Mr Pipes speaks French and reads Arabic and German. He has taught at the University of Chicago, Harvard University, the US Naval War College, and Pepperdine University.
Pipes also served in various capacities in the US Government, including two presidentially-appointed positions: vice chairman of the Fulbright Board of Foreign Scholarships and member of the board of the US Institute of Peace. He was director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute in 1986-93.
Wafa Sultan – Wafa Sultan is an author and well known critic of Islam. Sultan trained as a psychiatrist in Syria and is a U.S. naturalized citizen.James Taranto – James Taranto (born 1966) is a Manhattan-based columnist for The Wall Street Journal and editor of its online editorial page, OpinionJournal.com. He is best known for his daily online column, entitled Best of the Web Today, in which he links to and comments on news stories and Web sites submitted by readers. He also appears occasionally on Journal Editorial Report.
Varieties of Non Belief
Susan Jacoby discusses the effects religion has had on American politics since the drafting of the Constitution. Denys Turner points out that despite America’s formal separation of church and state, religion permeates politics to a greater degree than in Britain, where there is a government-sanctioned church.
© FORA TV
http://fora.tv/2009/12/07/The_Great_Issues_Forum_Varieties_of_Nonbelief
—————————-
Journalist Susan Jacoby, philosopher Colin McGinn, and theologian Denys Turner explore questions such as: Is humanism another kind of religion? Is it religion’s evolutionary future, rather than just one of several alternatives? What light does the recent scientific study of religion throw on these possibilities?
How do the new humanists compare to the new atheists? Can an atheist identity be shaped by a positive ethic, or must it be primarily an anti-religious sentiment? How will the persistence of belief and disbelief, as well as the tension between them, shape thought and culture in the 21st century? – CUNY
Susan Jacoby is the author of The Age of American Unreason. She began her writing career as a reporter for The Washington Post, and has been a contributor to a wide range of periodicals and newspapers for more than 25 years on topics including law, religion, medicine, aging, women’s rights, political dissent in the Soviet Union and Russian literature.
Jacoby has been the recipient of grants from the Guggenheim, Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, as well as the National Endowment for the Humanities. In 2001-2002, she was named a fellow at the Center for Scholars and Writers at the New York Public Library. Jacoby’s other books include Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism (2004); Wild Justice: The Evolution of Revenge, a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 1984, and Half-Jew: A Daughter’s Search for Her Family’s Buried Past.
Denys Alan Turner is a British academic in the field of philosophy and theology. He is currently Professor of Historical Theology at Yale University having been appointed in 2005, previously having been Norris-Hulse Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University. He earned his PhD in Philosophy from Oxford University.
He has written widely on political theory and social theory in relation to Christian theology, as well as on Medieval thought, in particular, mystical theology.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvsH4NcxivY&feature=sub
Debate: Is atheism the new fundamentalism?
From Intelligence 2
For the first time, this Intelligence Squared debate was live-streamed over the internet, allowing people to watch, and participate, from anywhere in the world. The online audience’s vote is included below.
Initial Vote: For 333, Against 675, Undecided 389
Final Vote: For 363, Against 1070, Undecided 85
Final Online Vote: For 37, Against 889, Undecided 12
The motion proposes that “atheism is the new fundamentalism”, i.e., atheism has replaced religion as the new faith of the secular age, exploring the notion that modern atheism is itself guilty of the very dogma and belief in its own infallibility which it scorns in the religious community.
Speaking for the motion are Richard Harries and Charles Moore.
Richard Harries outlines the features and the history of fundamentalism, arguing that many of the criteria required for it are in fact apparent in today’s atheists. He portrays a set of people with narrow views, arguing against a specific view of God, who forget that some of the greatest philosophy, art, poetry and music has been inspired and supported by Christianity – the very belief system that is accused of restricting the creative process by its refusal to allow for ‘the grand perhaps’ (Browning).
Charles Moore insists that his opponents cannot see the true complexity of the argument, and that they emphasise the physical and the scientific aspect of humanity at the cost of any spiritual understanding. He criticises Richard Dawkins for embodying this crude and narrow pursuit of literal truth above all else.
Opposing the motion are A.C. Grayling and Richard Dawkins.
Professor Grayling maintains that since 9/11, the nature of the debate on religious commitment has become far more serious. He distinguishes between atheism, secularism and humanism. He refutes Moore’s suggestion that atheists cannot fully understand the complexity of the religious experience, insisting that many atheists understand it all too well, having been brought up in a religious family or community.
Richard Dawkins defines fundamentalism as the following: blind obedience to scripture regardless of evidence, allied to extremism. He argues that far from being entrenched fundamentalists, atheists have a commitment to exploring evidence, and a readiness to embrace change, and that we should not mistake the passion of their arguments or their refusal to remain silent for fundamentalism.
This event was the first in a new partnership between Intelligence Squared and Wellington College. To find out more, visit Wellington College.
Hitchens, Harris, Dennett vs Boteach, D’Souza, Wright
Debate:
Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett vs Dinesh D’Souza, Shmuley Boteach, Nassim Taleb.
Neutral: Robert Wright.
—————————
Search
Atheist Age: Live Stream 11pm Tuesdays
Check Your Timezone. Select "Australia - Victoria - Melbourne" in the first field. Select your location in the second. Don't forget to select 23/11pm in the hour field. Amaze and astound your friends in a timely fashion.
Atheist Age on FacebookHelp promote equal rights, science literacy and human tolerance
Tags
Blogroll
- Atheist Foundation of Australia
- Australian Skeptics
- Bad Astronomy
- Center For Inquiry
- Evolution
- Fifteen Answers to Creationist Nonsense
- Freethought Multimedia
- Humanist and Ethical Union
- Humanist Society of Victoria
- Infidel Guy
- Melbourne Atheists
- Pharyngula
- Point of Inquiry
- Rationalist Society of Australia
- Religion News in Brief
- Skepticality
- Understanding Evolution
- University of Melbourne Secular Society