I can write any old shit, as long as it’s 1000 words and stirs up the bible-bashers (and koran-bashirs) on one side and the rationalists on the other.
Religion is then not fundamentally different from masturbation, both seem like attempts to frame true beliefs about the world.
Religion is then not fundamentally different from eructation, both seem like attempts to frame true beliefs about the world.
Writes itself.
😉
It was almost certainly deliberate trolling.
I’ve made my own comment on that Beeb page!
One should also remember that the current head of the Beeb is totally brainwashed RC – Patten. Ugh.
While that article is pretty poorly written (which is a shame because Gray normally writes quite well) there is a lot of truth in what Gray argues about religion and science. Effectively, he sees much of the faith in modern science (especially to save humanity from itself) as just as much of a dogmatic belief system as religion. The end result is that many people have an unthinking, dogmatic belief in Science just as many people used to have (and some do still have) an unthinking, dogmatic belief in God.
There are clear implications of this, as seen in the reverence some people have for “scientific” social theories such as Marxism. The horrors of Stalinism, of the Cultural Revolution in China and the Khmer Rouge all stem from this notion of scientific progress across all elements of society. Likewise, Gray has also convincingly argued that scientific advances can be just as devastating as they can productive. For example, the industrial killing of the Holocaust was, to a large extent, enabled by scientific advances.
The point is that we always need to be questioning people who assert to have found the truth and/or a path to the truth – regardless of whether they come from religious leaders or scientific thinkers. Or, for that matter, politicians. The problem, as Gray finally gets around to arguing, is not religion or science. Rather, it is unthinking belief that is the real issue.
And I think that is a very persuasive argument. It is just a shame that Gray, as is so often the case, wants to make provocative statements rather than being calmer and putting together a persuasive, cogent argument.
DISCLAIMER: I am an atheist. I’m looking to defend Gray’s wider thought here, not religion. Just as Gray is not actually looking to defend religion in his article, despite the way he frames his argument.
I can write any old shit, as long as it’s 1000 words and stirs up the bible-bashers (and koran-bashirs) on one side and the rationalists on the other.
Religion is then not fundamentally different from masturbation, both seem like attempts to frame true beliefs about the world.
Religion is then not fundamentally different from eructation, both seem like attempts to frame true beliefs about the world.
Writes itself.
😉
It was almost certainly deliberate trolling.
I’ve made my own comment on that Beeb page!
One should also remember that the current head of the Beeb is totally brainwashed RC – Patten. Ugh.
While that article is pretty poorly written (which is a shame because Gray normally writes quite well) there is a lot of truth in what Gray argues about religion and science. Effectively, he sees much of the faith in modern science (especially to save humanity from itself) as just as much of a dogmatic belief system as religion. The end result is that many people have an unthinking, dogmatic belief in Science just as many people used to have (and some do still have) an unthinking, dogmatic belief in God.
There are clear implications of this, as seen in the reverence some people have for “scientific” social theories such as Marxism. The horrors of Stalinism, of the Cultural Revolution in China and the Khmer Rouge all stem from this notion of scientific progress across all elements of society. Likewise, Gray has also convincingly argued that scientific advances can be just as devastating as they can productive. For example, the industrial killing of the Holocaust was, to a large extent, enabled by scientific advances.
The point is that we always need to be questioning people who assert to have found the truth and/or a path to the truth – regardless of whether they come from religious leaders or scientific thinkers. Or, for that matter, politicians. The problem, as Gray finally gets around to arguing, is not religion or science. Rather, it is unthinking belief that is the real issue.
And I think that is a very persuasive argument. It is just a shame that Gray, as is so often the case, wants to make provocative statements rather than being calmer and putting together a persuasive, cogent argument.
DISCLAIMER: I am an atheist. I’m looking to defend Gray’s wider thought here, not religion. Just as Gray is not actually looking to defend religion in his article, despite the way he frames his argument.