Comments on: The God Delusion? http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/ "it's funny how the history building is so modern when history is so old." Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:29:07 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: On God, still « Mumble Mumble… http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-82 On God, still « Mumble Mumble… Wed, 01 Nov 2006 22:47:45 +0000 http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-82 [...] Even since I read a post over at Wandering Apricot about Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion I’ve been thinking a lot about both religion’s (and religious organizations’) role in society and the role religious beliefs must play in understanding the mind.  Apparently, for some reason, this is on the minds of other Wordpress bloggers as well (including some pretty fierce debate over at this blog about evangelism and even the possibility of the existence of a God). Recently, I mentioned an article by Paul Bloom about a cognitive/evolutionary basis for religious and superstitious belief.  It’s a good, easy read that will probably be interesting to anyone that cares to read it, given that having an opinion on religion is hard to escape.  What follows was originally conceived as a response to Apricot’s comment, but it was getting long enough to warrant it’s own post, so here it is: [...] [...] Even since I read a post over at Wandering Apricot about Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion I’ve been thinking a lot about both religion’s (and religious organizations’) role in society and the role religious beliefs must play in understanding the mind.  Apparently, for some reason, this is on the minds of other WordPress bloggers as well (including some pretty fierce debate over at this blog about evangelism and even the possibility of the existence of a God). Recently, I mentioned an article by Paul Bloom about a cognitive/evolutionary basis for religious and superstitious belief.  It’s a good, easy read that will probably be interesting to anyone that cares to read it, given that having an opinion on religion is hard to escape.  What follows was originally conceived as a response to Apricot’s comment, but it was getting long enough to warrant it’s own post, so here it is: [...]

]]> By: God Delusion pt. II « wandering apricot http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-75 God Delusion pt. II « wandering apricot Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:37:04 +0000 http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-75 [...] I’d like to quote the eloquent Coconut who commented on my post on Dawkins & Eagleton: [...] [...] I’d like to quote the eloquent Coconut who commented on my post on Dawkins & Eagleton: [...]

]]> By: apricot http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-74 apricot Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:14:30 +0000 http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-74 beautifully put. I couldn't agree more. beautifully put. I couldn’t agree more.

]]> By: Coconuts http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-73 Coconuts Wed, 25 Oct 2006 02:46:51 +0000 http://apricot.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/the-god-delusion/#comment-73 I thoroughly agree with your suggestion "that rabid atheists like Dawkins and rabid fundamentalists like Pat Roberts have a lot in common." In addition to the similarities you pointed out, I think that both think not in terms of religion as the collective expression of the common elements in individuals' relationships with God but in terms of social and cultural institutions. When religion becomes "organized religion" it loses touch with that individual striving you refer to that makes religion compelling in the first place, and becomes just another social institution. It's not the faith itself or the philosophical system that's to blame, but the social institutions that have become entangled with those things. I thoroughly agree with your suggestion “that rabid atheists like Dawkins and rabid fundamentalists like Pat Roberts have a lot in common.” In addition to the similarities you pointed out, I think that both think not in terms of religion as the collective expression of the common elements in individuals’ relationships with God but in terms of social and cultural institutions.

When religion becomes “organized religion” it loses touch with that individual striving you refer to that makes religion compelling in the first place, and becomes just another social institution. It’s not the faith itself or the philosophical system that’s to blame, but the social institutions that have become entangled with those things.

]]>