Re: Is Neo-Atheism The Way to Go? [Poll]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see why you can't advocate strong atheism without being civil. I don't see anything uncivil about hefty disagreement.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the entire problem. It seems that atheists are the violators, but it's actually the opposite.
Civil debate, at its fundamental level, requires the opposing parties to be rational. There can't be debate if the opposing parties can't agree on a rational framework to the discourse. The problem with theism, in debates, is that it frames itself as rational but is very much non-rational.
Just think about it: If your position is already decided, how can you possibly be rational about it? No matter what information you or your foe presents, you can't change your basic premise. But the IDiots (and others from theological positions) frame the debate such that if you don't accept their premises you are contrarian and contemptible to their faith, which is unacceptable.
Rational debate is the bane of theological debate.
|