|
|
#1
08-04-2007, 04:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
In My Last Post I referred to The debate between Andrew Sullivan and Sam Harris.. Harris is an atheist. Sullivan is a Catholic.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of fluff, particularly in the first half. Skip straight to Part Two if you basically just want the conclusions they draw. It really seems to me that the atheist won, or rather the theist conceded, and even Andrew Sullivan (the theist), acknowledged that. (Edit: I really liked this quote from Harris: "I now feel like a tennis player, in mid-serve, who notices that his opponent is no longer holding a racket.") Harris basically would say, "you claim that your beliefs are founded on x, y, and z. X is not true. Y does not justify your beliefs, and Z actually justifies my beliefs more than yours. How do you respond?" Sullivan would just say, "You are correct. All your points are valid. However, God is love, and I know it inside of me to be true." Sorry, but you lose. The most ridiculous part of Sullivan's argument was that he justified his beliefs, and the debate itself by saying that the atheist is too confident. He then talked about how he had both humility and doubt in his beliefs, and accepted that other's might indeed be right. He then later stated, unambiguously, that he has NEVER doubted that God exists. Furthermore, his only defense seemed to be that he knows for sure he is right. Why is it that atheists have the stigma (stereotype a better word perhaps?) of being the unreasonably confident ones? He even stated that logically, his opponent was right, and many readers will probably acknowledge that he lost the debate, however, the debate only strengthened his beliefs, similar to the way that his homosexuality strengthens his belief in Catholicism. I am baffled at how this intelligent person can take EVERYTHING as a sign that he is right, no matter how illogical, ridiculous, or based upon pure evil it is. Despite the fact that this baffles me, this seems to be a very common dialog between atheists and theists, although I think Harris did a good job of getting Sullivan to stop "beating around the bush" and acknowledge his points. 
|
|
#2
08-04-2007, 05:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
He [Sullivan] then later stated, unambiguously, that he has NEVER doubted that God exists. [/ QUOTE ] I would wager good money that is something that was indoctrinated into him while on his “mother’s knee”. All children are atheists, at least passively. -Zeno
|
|
#3
08-04-2007, 05:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
I would wager good money that is something that was indoctrinated into him while on his “mother’s knee”. All children are atheists, at least passively. -Zeno [/ QUOTE ] No they're not. They may not be born again Christians yet, but if they died as an infant, they would have a place in Heaven.
|
|
#5
08-04-2007, 05:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I would wager good money that is something that was indoctrinated into him while on his “mother’s knee”. All children are atheists, at least passively. -Zeno [/ QUOTE ] No they're not. They may not be born again Christians yet, but if they died as an infant, they would have a place in Heaven. [/ QUOTE ] wow, dude.
|
|
#6
08-04-2007, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I would wager good money that is something that was indoctrinated into him while on his “mother’s knee”. All children are atheists, at least passively. -Zeno [/ QUOTE ] No they're not. They may not be born again Christians yet, but if they died as an infant, they would have a place in Heaven. [/ QUOTE ] This kind of thinking is what lead to the practice of Spanish priests baptising Native Americam babies and then killing them. (Oh and don't forget Andrea Yates.)
|
|
#7
08-04-2007, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
In My Last Post I referred to The debate between Andrew Sullivan and Sam Harris.. Harris is an atheist. Sullivan is a Catholic. [/ QUOTE ] we've done this debate.
|
|
#8
08-04-2007, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I would wager good money that is something that was indoctrinated into him while on his “mother’s knee”. All children are atheists, at least passively. -Zeno [/ QUOTE ] No they're not. They may not be born again Christians yet, but if they died as an infant, they would have a place in Heaven. [/ QUOTE ] This kind of thinking is what lead to the practice of Spanish priests baptising Native Americam babies and then killing them. (Oh and don't forget Andrea Yates.) [/ QUOTE ] "The Ku Klux Klan Guide to Catholicism" is not an accurate source for history.
|
|
#10
08-04-2007, 06:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Harris Vs Sullivan - Atheism vs Catholocism
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I would wager good money that is something that was indoctrinated into him while on his “mother’s knee”. All children are atheists, at least passively. -Zeno [/ QUOTE ] No they're not. They may not be born again Christians yet, but if they died as an infant, they would have a place in Heaven. [/ QUOTE ] You are missing the point. Even religious people believe that a newborn is not smart enough to comprehend the idea of a God. Therefore, he is atheist (by at least one of the definitions of the word) for at least some short portion of his life. Whether or not he goes to heaven is not relevant to Zeno's point.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
