The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions by David Berlinski

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/04/14/the-devils-delusion-atheism-and-its-scientific-pretensions-by-david-berlinski/ ^ | W M Briggs

[mattstat]

There are, as everybody knows, a recent number of books seeking to either demonstrate, scientifically, that God does not exist, or to show that the love of religion is the root of all evil. Some familiar names: Daniel Dennet, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Weinberg, Victor Stenger, Christopher Hitchens, and even John Allen Paulos. All proclaim that the weight of scientific evidence is either completely or heavily on the side of the non existence of God.

The question is, of course: Has the authority of eminent scientists enabled them to prove their case? Berlinski says, “Not even close.” Not only have they not come close, Berlinski goes further and shows how easily they are persuaded by weak or demonstrably false arguments, and the extraordinary lengths that some scientists will go, in the sense of believing bizarre theories, to avoid ceding any ground to the “religionists.” Their distaste of religion has also lead them to say some rather stupid things. For example, Berlinsky quotes the eminent biologist Emile Zuckerkandl as saying that if God exists, He would represent “something like a pathology of the state of being.” An enjoyable, sputtering rant by that author...

[Jeff Head]

An equally strong delusion is the growing number of adherants to philosphies such as Tolle's, "The Power of Now", which in essences says that any "God" will do as long as you hook into the spiritual power that can lead your life.

Such a philosophy, IMHO, sets up people as whole for that charismatic character who we all know will one day enter and command the world stage and deny the One God in favor of himself.

[j. earl carter]

I still don’t understand any of this. If a person is really an atheist, why would he care. A real atheist would just laugh at the silly people and their silly beliefs. Anyone who is offended by religion must have something going on other than just being a non-believer.

[Gullit]

I’ve noticed with the atheists I know, the need to justify their atheism. It is a hard thing to understand, since it isn’t common for christians to run around justifying their beliefs. That’s where this stems from, I believe.

[j. earl carter]

Yes, it's as if they were trying to recruit you to atheism. Recruiting me to Christ, or Allah, or whoever; I understand. You just want to save my soul.

But, recruiting me to atheism? Why? What are you trying to save me from? It's not as if believing in a god who doesn't exist is doing me any harm.

[Robert DeLong]

I think the answer to your question is that they believe belief in God is the root of all problems. Therefore, in their minds it is imperative to convert people into rejecting the existance of God. Just out of curiousity, why did you pick Jimmy Carter’s name for your moniker?

[j. earl carter]

because calling myself “R. Wilson Reagan” would be blasphemy.

[Zionist Conspirator]

I still don’t understand any of this. If a person is really an atheist, why would he care. A real atheist would just laugh at the silly people and their silly beliefs. Anyone who is offended by religion must have something going on other than just being a non-believer.

Precisely! Yet atheists not only engage in missionary activity and demonize their opponents, but get worked up over such things as "social injustice" (or "racism" or "sexism" or "oppression" or whatever) when the non-existence of G-d means that there's nothing objectively wrong with injustice, or racism, or sexism, or anything else.

"Religion is immoral" is the stupidest argument ever uttered, since "immorality" depends on G-d to define it. In the absence of G-d nothing--not even mass murder--can be objectively immoral.

So why are atheists such inveterate moral crusaders?

[informavoracious]

I don’t believe in little green men from Mars. I don’t spend time reading books about my unbelie, and I don’t condem believers. Some atheists are scared to death they are wrong, so have to continually shore up their ‘religion.’

[onedoug]

Most atheists I’ve encountered know nothing of science, and their usual reply after a few minutes is, “I don’t want to talk about it.”

[Tax-chick]

I got this book from the library last week. Haven’t read it yet.

[dmz]

I’ve noticed with the atheists I know, the need to justify their atheism.
______

So, they just come up to you out of the blue, and say, atheism is true because [fill in the blank]? Or do they attempt to justify their beliefs in a conversation about yours or others beliefs?

[allmendream]

Absence of evidence is not and never will be evidence of absence.

Some of us have something called faith, including most U.S. Scientists.

[TASMANIANRED]

Immoral Crusaders.

The fools.. Without religion there would be no science..There would be a certain amount of technology but the foundations of science depended on the belief that God created an orderly world that could be understood.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Immoral Crusaders.

The fools.. Without religion there would be no science..There would be a certain amount of technology but the foundations of science depended on the belief that God created an orderly world that could be understood.

My position is much more radical--without religion there is no morality and no grounds on which to accuse religion of being "immoral" in the first place.

[Gullit]

I guess what I’m trying to convey is that the atheists I know are very vocal about their beliefs, and are constantly trying to explain it to me. Personally, I don’t give a crap, and wonder why they feel the need to express themselves to me. They don’t know what my beliefs are (we usually talk politics or some other nonsense.) So, no I don’t bring it up, if that is what you are asking.