Comments on: Report from the Secular Society Conference: Day Two

By: Samuel Skinner

Samuel Skinner — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:12:56 +0000

Evolution is incompatible with theistic beliefs. You can try to fix them but it doesn't really work. The theory implicitly implies that there are no such things as souls, by making a continuim of intelligent creatures and forcing you to choose when they are added. The exception would probably be animism which holds that everything has a soul.

Finally, I still get a kick out of Noma. You can use science to prove you or other people exist (the normal way, or the CSI version), why wouldn't you be able to do the same to god?

By: Chris Whiley

Chris Whiley — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:23:32 +0000

I think Richard Dawkins would suggest, kindly of course, that any Christian who professes to accept evolution hasn't thought the thing through. How can the human species be, on the one hand, one example of many fit-for-purpose combinations of complex organic molecules making a brief experience on one of billions of worlds and, on the other, the sole species for which the humanised Son of God allowed himself to be crucified? It's the Christians that need NOMA not the scientists.

By: Polly

Polly — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:35:35 +0000

his belief that evolution logically implies atheism,

Does it? That seems to be extrapolating too much from evolution. There are certainly many god-believers, even xians, who accept evolution as god's way without qualms. I'd be interested in hearing his train of thought on this.

I also reject the NOM concept. When a religion has something to say about the natural world, science can confirm or debunk it (almost always the latter). We shouldn't shy away from that.
As to the existence of "non-physical" realities, my view is that science can neither confirm nor deny them. But, we can debunk the so-called "evidence" for them - ghosts, seances with apparitions, oui-ja boards giving answers etc. by showing the underlying physical causes behind them...the tricks.

By: lpetrich

lpetrich — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 07:16:21 +0000

Valhar2000, it must be said that some forms of religion are very pacifist, but such forms have not been very prominent in recent years; it's the belligerent and violent forms that have been taking center stage.

By: Nes

Nes — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:41:46 +0000

I would agree about Ann being smart (like I said, her chapters are every bit as good as Carl's), and I certainly didn't mean to imply that she got it all from Carl or anything like that. Meeting her in and of itself would be wonderful.

By: Valhar2000

Valhar2000 — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:03:26 +0000

Possibly becuase, as a british comedian whose name I can't remember once said, you could have religion without violence, but I'm not sure anyone would see the point.

By: J Myers

J Myers — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:56:51 +0000

For a fundie Jew or Christian, the creation account of Genesis trumps what biology, geology, and astronomy have to say...

This is certainly true, and I'm beginning to suspect it is a situation that rationality alone cannot overcome. Why don't we write our own book of creation myth--and make it sensible and consistent--and then see if we can't establish a new religion that will squeeze the extant ones to the point of marginality in a millennium or two? It can have all that fantastical nonsense that religious people so enjoy, it just won't have any stories about bears mauling hordes of children or instructions to stone anyone for the pettiest of trespasses.

By: JumpingFromConclusions

JumpingFromConclusions — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:11:57 +0000

I hope you had a good time there; it sounds like you did. The whole event sounds very interesting. I'd love to hear some of those speakers. As someone with a utilitarian philosophy of ethics, I would have really loved to hear Singer speak.

Thanks for keeping us posted!

By: Tommykey

Tommykey — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:23:24 +0000

Ornery, I think the problem is that religious fundamentalists believe the Bible or the Quran has something to say about science. For a fundie Jew or Christian, the creation account of Genesis trumps what biology, geology, and astronomy have to say about our world and the universe.

By: Ebonmuse

Ebonmuse — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:15:01 +0000

I agree, Nes - this conference drew a very diverse audience. I'm happy to say that there weren't just a lot of female speakers (and I haven't yet mentioned Nica Lalli, who was also there today), but a lot of female attendees as well. This is purely anecdotal, but I'd estimate it at between 200 and 300 attendees, of which about one-third were women.

Also, for the record, Ann Druyan is a brilliant, gifted woman. It'd be doing her a disservice to say that much of Carl Sagan's spirit lives in her - her intelligence is her own, she didn't absorb it from him. I'm sure the causation is the other way around, and they married because they each sensed a kindred mind in the other. Nevertheless, many of his ideas and his way of viewing the world live on in her, and for that I'm grateful.