Comments on: The Inaugural Very Short Introductions Column: Atheism http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/ Academic insights for the thinking world. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:48:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Damned http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-153022 Damned Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:43:33 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-153022 Atheism is there to stay in the public debate, as much as abortion, public healthcare etc. The amount of atheists is proportionally growing, not only in the US but everywhere in the western world. It´s not a bypassing trend, but a wake up call for all believers of any faith, to think are their medieval believes really reasonable, or even sane for that matter? Atheism is there to stay in the public debate, as much as abortion, public healthcare etc. The amount of atheists is proportionally growing, not only in the US but everywhere in the western world. It´s not a bypassing trend, but a wake up call for all believers of any faith, to think are their medieval believes really reasonable, or even sane for that matter?

]]> By: mark santos http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-147629 mark santos Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:44:32 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-147629 Mr. Obama have the Bible, pray his God, same as Bush. Bush killing 1.200000 people in Iraq. Why? Mr. Hussein Obama want Change something: What? The new War in Iran with AIPAC? And with Military Bible??? Mr. Obama have the Bible, pray his God, same as
Bush. Bush killing 1.200000 people in Iraq. Why?
Mr. Hussein Obama want Change something: What?
The new War in Iran with AIPAC? And with Military
Bible???

]]> By: mark santos http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-147628 mark santos Sat, 18 Oct 2008 12:41:42 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-147628 What is a Religion? 1. Genocids 2. War 3. Racism 4. Destroy 5. Slavery 6. Hate 7. Intoleranc 8. Antisemitism 9. Kannibalism (Solutions of the Bible) What is a Religion?
1. Genocids
2. War
3. Racism
4. Destroy
5. Slavery
6. Hate
7. Intoleranc
8. Antisemitism
9. Kannibalism (Solutions of the Bible)

]]> By: Introducing Atheism « ANIMAL MY SOUL http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-145606 Introducing Atheism « ANIMAL MY SOUL Tue, 06 May 2008 20:44:28 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-145606 [...] 99 in the Oxford University Press ‘a very short introduction’ series. You can find a Blog interview with Baggini on the OUP site devoted to these [...] [...] 99 in the Oxford University Press ‘a very short introduction’ series. You can find a Blog interview with Baggini on the OUP site devoted to these [...]

]]> By: Matt http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-139685 Matt Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:20:58 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-139685 kevin expresses a very twisted, biased view of religious belief and faith, of course -- one that does a disservice to more thoughtful atheists. As I hope most people reading this blog already realize that, there's little point in trying to respond to his rant. kevin expresses a very twisted, biased view of religious belief and faith, of course — one that does a disservice to more thoughtful atheists. As I hope most people reading this blog already realize that, there’s little point in trying to respond to his rant.

]]> By: chelsea http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-127288 chelsea Fri, 01 Feb 2008 01:18:56 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-127288 kevin, have you read descarte's mediatations? kevin, have you read descarte’s mediatations?

]]> By: Cesar Elizi http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-41487 Cesar Elizi Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:07:13 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-41487 It’s interesting that the ‘talk’ with the author begins with the question “If there is no God, why bother being good?” Supposing there is a God right now, do we see people or governments attempting to be good? Not really! And among the countries which are causing havoc worldwide, one wonders why we see mostly religious ones… Last but not least, congrats on the blog and on the choice of Julian Baggini to write a VSI on Atheism. I dare say there’s something about the series which is inherently appropriate to the 21st century. It’s interesting that the ‘talk’ with the author begins with the question “If there is no God, why bother being good?” Supposing there is a God right now, do we see people or governments attempting to be good? Not really! And among the countries which are causing havoc worldwide, one wonders why we see mostly religious ones…
Last but not least, congrats on the blog and on the choice of Julian Baggini to write a VSI on Atheism. I dare say there’s something about the series which is inherently appropriate to the 21st century.

]]> By: Interesting posts 5 >> Incessant Expressions http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-31320 Interesting posts 5 >> Incessant Expressions Tue, 21 Aug 2007 03:54:30 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-31320 [...] Q&A with the author of Atheism: A Very Short Introduction Very insightful and reasonably smart questions with poignantly smart answers [...] [...] Q&A with the author of Atheism: A Very Short Introduction Very insightful and reasonably smart questions with poignantly smart answers [...]

]]> By: John Doole http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-28625 John Doole Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:04:36 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-28625 I think to refer to the writing of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens as 'strident' is wrong. They may be passionate, but they're certainly not strident. It's odd that when it comes to politics, music, literature, theartre, restaurants, haircuts, shoes, interior design and most other topics of conversation, people can hold robust, piquant views and no-one bats an eyelid, but when it comes to religion all the rules seem to change and it must be spoken of in hushed, respectful tones. Why? Dawkins and Hitchens could never be accused of fundamentalism or dogmatism as their views are based on evidence and study, and they would gladly change their views if new evidence came to light. Religion is nothing but dogmatic because it is belief without, and in spite of, eveidence. I think to refer to the writing of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens as ’strident’ is wrong. They may be passionate, but they’re certainly not strident. It’s odd that when it comes to politics, music, literature, theartre, restaurants, haircuts, shoes, interior design and most other topics of conversation, people can hold robust, piquant views and no-one bats an eyelid, but when it comes to religion all the rules seem to change and it must be spoken of in hushed, respectful tones. Why?

Dawkins and Hitchens could never be accused of fundamentalism or dogmatism as their views are based on evidence and study, and they would gladly change their views if new evidence came to light. Religion is nothing but dogmatic because it is belief without, and in spite of, eveidence.

]]> By: Duncan http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-27178 Duncan Sun, 12 Aug 2007 19:25:29 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-27178 This seems a good place to point out the relative oddity that is the placement of 'philosophy' under 'religion' on the OUP blog. 'Religion' under 'philosophy' I could vaguely understand, though I'd question why not substituting a general umbrella term such as 'humanities', but to give the appearance of believing philosophy to be in any sense a subset of religion seems to be nothing less than a casual slap in the face to thoroughly irreligious philosophers such as myself and the excellent Dr Baggini interviewed above (not to mention countless others). Duncan. This seems a good place to point out the relative oddity that is the placement of ‘philosophy’ under ‘religion’ on the OUP blog. ‘Religion’ under ‘philosophy’ I could vaguely understand, though I’d question why not substituting a general umbrella term such as ‘humanities’, but to give the appearance of believing philosophy to be in any sense a subset of religion seems to be nothing less than a casual slap in the face to thoroughly irreligious philosophers such as myself and the excellent Dr Baggini interviewed above (not to mention countless others).

Duncan.

]]> By: kevin http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-27104 kevin Sun, 12 Aug 2007 13:41:32 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-27104 i however, dont NEED to have the fear of burning forever to do the right thing. and even if there IS a deity, would it want people who did the right thing because it was right? or would the deity rather have people who only refrain from mayhem, because they are cringing in fear...... and THEN i wonder, why would an all knowing, all seeing, all LOVING, deity NEED to create little FLAWED human beings to worship it in the first place?.... then if the flawed little beings, (made flawed by the deity), succumb to the temptations placed around it, or if they failed to worship the deity in exactly the way some fat hick preacher with a bad hairdoo says they should, or some priestophile says they should, then that deity would BURN THEM FOR EVER? essentially punishing them for ITS OWN MISTAKE OF NOT MAKEING US ALL PERFECT IN THE FIRST PLACE????? thats just sick. who would really want to hang out with a control freak, needy, posessive, stalkerish, vengeful, deity like that anyway, we put human's like that in jail. i dont want any part of any deity like that nor do i want to hang out with the sycophantic, fear driven monkeys with car keys, that cringe at its feet.... and...i mean... do you all really want to go to a place where people like jerry falwell and pat robertson and jimmy swaggert will be? heh. i however, dont NEED to have the fear of burning forever to do the right thing. and even if there IS a deity, would it want people who did the right thing because it was right? or would the deity rather have people who only refrain from mayhem, because they are cringing in fear……
and THEN i wonder, why would an all knowing, all seeing, all LOVING, deity NEED to create little FLAWED human beings to worship it in the first place?…. then if the flawed little beings, (made flawed by the deity), succumb to the temptations placed around it, or if they failed to worship the deity in exactly the way some fat hick preacher with a bad hairdoo says they should, or some priestophile says they should, then that deity would BURN THEM FOR EVER? essentially punishing them for ITS OWN MISTAKE OF NOT MAKEING US ALL PERFECT IN THE FIRST PLACE????? thats just sick.

who would really want to hang out with a control freak, needy, posessive, stalkerish, vengeful, deity like that anyway, we put human’s like that in jail.

i dont want any part of any deity like that nor do i want to hang out with the sycophantic, fear driven monkeys with car keys, that cringe at its feet…. and…i mean… do you all really want to go to a place where people like jerry falwell and pat robertson and jimmy swaggert will be? heh.

]]> By: kevin http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-27101 kevin Sun, 12 Aug 2007 13:26:37 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-27101 its amazing how many people, when you say you are atheist, say,"if there is no god, then why not rape, pillage, and burn?". it shows me who THEY really are and what they think of other people... and it makes me think... "YOU NEED GOD" its amazing how many people, when you say you are atheist, say,”if there is no god, then why not rape, pillage, and burn?”. it shows me who THEY really are and what they think of other people… and it makes me think… “YOU NEED GOD”

]]> By: Ophelia Benson http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-26281 Ophelia Benson Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:06:20 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-26281 I would say 'this interest in strident atheism' is all right as a short-term thing, as a necessary wake-up call. It's not entirely good if it goes on indefinitely, but I tend to think that nothing less will do by way of an attention-grabbing reminder that theism is neither mandatory nor universal. I would say ‘this interest in strident atheism’ is all right as a short-term thing, as a necessary wake-up call. It’s not entirely good if it goes on indefinitely, but I tend to think that nothing less will do by way of an attention-grabbing reminder that theism is neither mandatory nor universal.

]]> By: Friendly Atheist » Atheism: A Very Short Introduction http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-26117 Friendly Atheist » Atheism: A Very Short Introduction Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:37:53 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-26117 [...] recently did an interview with the OUPblog. OUP: Why do you think the recent books by Richard Dawkins and Christopher [...] [...] recently did an interview with the OUPblog. OUP: Why do you think the recent books by Richard Dawkins and Christopher [...]

]]> By: blog.talkingphilosophy.com » Short Q&A on atheism http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/comment-page-1/#comment-26108 blog.talkingphilosophy.com » Short Q&A on atheism Thu, 09 Aug 2007 16:38:51 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/08/vsi_baggini/#comment-26108 [...] a little thing I did for Oxford University Press on atheism. Or, if you want the highlights: “We live in an [...] [...] a little thing I did for Oxford University Press on atheism. Or, if you want the highlights: “We live in an [...]

]]>