On TV: The Trouble with Atheism

[juantoo3]

BTW, thanks for the discussion. Didn't get to see the program, although I probably would have if available. I especially appreciate BB's post.

[seattlegal]

The program is now up on youtube for those who didn't catch it:
Part One

Part Two

[seattlegal]

Here's a more direct link to Part Two if the above one doesn't work.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, all!

Hmmm, intriguing. I would not be surprized *if* Hitler did indeed issue such proclamation, although this is the first I have heard of this. Of course, it seems a tad counter-productive...considering a Concordat was signed with the Vatican. We might ask what a Concordat is, and I am certainly no expert. My understanding is that a Concordat is a legal "contract" of sorts legitimizing *only* Catholicism in those such countries as are party to said Concordat. In other words...perhaps Hitler was against *Protestant* Christianity, however, there are photos and other intriguing instruments (or so I hear) that hint that there must have been some political influence directly from the Vatican. I do not bring this up to disparage any denomination, rather to add to the discussion relating to Hitler and Christianity. Seems I recall reading somewhere that Hitler was being groomed to be the heir to Charlemagne, the next Holy Roman Emperor.

And any way one cares to slice the issue, Hitler in no way acted as representative of the whole, or even significant portion, of the Christian faith.

What I find interesting with this is that the program addressed this issue to a point through this line of reasoning from the scientific viewpoint embraced by Hitler:

• Civilization negates the processes of natural selection by protecting the weak. They don't get "weeded out" through "natural selection" in a civilized society. Evolution stops without natural selection, so civilization stops evolution.
• Eugenics is the "civilized" way to replace "natural selection" as a means to "separate the wheat from the chaff," so to speak, so "evolution can continue."
• However, there is something inherent in man that stops man from employing eugenics--our conscience.

I find this following quote from Hitler as an indication that he followed this line of reasoning:

Originally Posted by Adolf Hitler

"I am liberating man from the degrading chimera known as `conscience'."

It seems that Hitler was embracing a more Atheistic line of reasoning than a Christian one, IMHO.

[seattlegal]

Here are some more interesting points to ponder that this program brought forward, IMHO:

• The Pyramid of Complexity, as presented by one person in the program, has a question mark at its base. {Compare to the quantum Uncertainty Principle and the ideas presented in the Rush to be Right thread.}
• The search for an Atheistic morality based upon reason. {doesn't it all come down to the Principle of Reciprocity, or The Golden Rule?}
• The idea put forward that science employs metaphors to explain concepts just as much as religion does, which leads towards scientific theories being expanded beyond their scientific limits.
• The idea that the potential for novelty spreads recessively throughout a given population until it reaches a "critical mass," which leads to a "sudden manifestation of novelty." This would run contrary to the idea of natural selection being the "driving force" behind evolution. What exactly is the "driving force" behind the sudden manifestation of novelty, then?

Lots of stuff to chew on, here!

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

It seems that Hitler was embracing a more Atheistic line of reasoning than a Christian one, IMHO.

Hi,

Well what he brought about certainly wasn't anything to do with the central teaching of Jesus (the Golden Rule) was it?

s.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Seattlegal!

Originally Posted by seattlegal

The program is now up on youtube for those who didn't catch it:

Thanks so much for the attempt. This site is blocked at work, and my antiquated dial-up modem isn't too happy with the format. I'll be forever just trying to watch the first episode (already spent ten minutes to see a broken up one minute segment before I quit). Drat!

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

[*]The search for an Atheistic morality based upon reason. [i]{doesn't it all come down to the Principle of Reciprocity, or The Golden Rule}

I'm still grappling with that one...I still think it is latent religious conditioning.

[*]The idea put forward that science employs metaphors to explain concepts just as much as religion does, which leads towards scientific theories being expanded beyond their scientific limits.

Which is what makes parables and similies such valuable teaching tools.

[*]The idea that the potential for novelty spreads recessively throughout a given population until it reaches a "critical mass," which leads to a "sudden manifestation of novelty." This would run contrary to the idea of natural selection being the "driving force" behind evolution. What exactly is the "driving force" behind the sudden manifestation of novelty, then?[/list]Lots of stuff to chew on, here!

Hmmm, "sudden manifestation of novelty"? Is that like..."something from nothing?" The ultimate wellspring? The source of all? The Grand Unified Theory? The singularity prior to the Big Bang?


the G-d particle?

[arthra]

I very much liked both videos on the Trouble with Atheism because it rasied the issues for modern society quite well and the need recognized for a basis for morality.

- Art

[flowperson]

Seattle...thanks for posting the youtube links.

I would tend to land on the side of those who assume a rational origin for universal structures. In my feeble imagination, I cannot comprehend that such effectively functioning material infrastructures do not have a divine intelligence behind them. The mystery of it all keeps drawing me towards it.

BTW..I once participated in a seminar with John Polkinghorne and he had a curious habit of staring at you as if you were some sort of lab specimen whenever you stated something that he clearly stood at odds with.

thanks again....flow....

[Caimanson]

Imo, atheism can sometimes be a religion, but it is always a faith.
I think the problem with atheism, is that their model/idea of god is conditioned by religious thinking.
Perhaps if there were more alternative views of god and the meaning of life, like for example the idea of an impersonal god with no strings attached, no certainty/uncertainty of afterlife.

The problem is that we like certainty, so traditional theism and atheism feel to me like human creations, determined by human nature.