Paul ’s Comments (group member since Sep 12, 2010)

Paul ’s comments from the Atheists and Skeptics group.

This is an excellent charity, as is Medicins Sans Frontiers/Doctors Without Borders.

I've refused to give to religious based charities for years, as so many of them use at least some of the funds to proselytise - even if they don't do it officially, being religious organisations many of the staff take that attitude. (I have a friend whose cousin was working for a charity in Afghanistan many years ago, and was using the Bible to teach English, completely against the advice and regulations. She was damned lucky not to get herself - and her colleagues - killed.)

I've not and, at the risk of appearing closed-minded, I don;t think I'd waste my time on it. Steve Novella (Skeptics Guide to the Universe host) gave a quite withering put-down of the book and the author.

Apparently all of Alexander's experiences fit clearly into fairly well understood near-death experience literature (lack of oxygen to the brain causing hallucinations and a narrowing of percept, to be simplistic), and his descriptions are clearly from the christian culture he grew up in.

This and the satanists the other week supporting Rick Perry on freedom of prayer in schools (even though that turned out to be a stunt) must be making some US fundies squirm.

I'm not sure I've ever read anything that has made me so angry. No amount of ignorance can excuse this sort of rape apologetics.

Xox wrote: "Ghamdi told Saudi officials he used cables and a cane on his five-year-old daughter, leaving her with multiple injuries, including a crushed skull, broken ribs and left arm, extensive bruising and ..."

I felt sick when I read that. How can someone do something like that, someone considered a moral leader, no less? And how can a society take it so lightly?


Shanawaz wrote: "I don't want to live on this planet anymore. "

Nah, I think the planet has a lot going for it; there's just a bunch of people and ideas we need to kick off it...

Great result, for human rights, progress and possibly severely damaging the Tories (I'm with Nye Bevan on that one),

Here's an interesting graphic showing the breakdown of voting across the UK. Apparently South Yorkshire (my neck o' the woods) is the only county to vote 100% in favour.

http://aremay.tumblr.com/post/4239687...

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/01/...

Nice list of songs, all with a godless bent. Like any compilation it's a mixed bag, so there ought to be something for most people - lots of Tim Minchin, Shelley Segal and Monty Python, so I'm happy.

As it's a long list of embedded vids it may take a few moments to load.

C.J. wrote: "As someone who actually lived in the delusion of Christianity for 14 years, I can testify that YES it is a mental illness. The only question is the degree of the illness within each individual believer. Some are just "casual" believers and the delusion never truly consumes them. Others like myself who dare to follow the Rabbit Hole all the way down become absolutely deluded. I was extremely fortunate to ever find my way out."


Glad you found your way out, CJ

As with so many questions, I'd say the answer is "it depends". At one time the idea that the world was controlled by supernatural forces was a reasonable hypothesis - for most of the time we wouldn't even have differentiated between 'natural' and 'supernatural'.

In an age when we can show that everything has a mechanistic, natural cause (and, even if we are not able to pinpoint that cause we can still show it to be by far the best explanation), hanging on to supernatural explanations may actually be delusional although, with the majority of theists, I think it is a matter of self delusion aided by cultural and social concerns rather than actual philosophy or metaphysics. I just don;t think that most people question their belief that deeply.

I think it does cross to actual delusion when people use their religion as a form of denialism, to support their beliefs against evidence. Even then, I'm not sure a large proportion would fit the medical definition of delusional.

The way I read The God Delusion was as much an analogy as anything. I think Dawkins did overcook it slightly for effect, in the same way as he and others have written about religion as a viral meme. The title and idea of religion as a delusion is a striking and useful jumping off point for the argument, but doesn't quite hold water if taken too literally.

Pamela wrote: "Thanks, tonight I will mostly be watching this debate"

:D

I'm adding it to my watch list for later. In response to the title: here here!

MadgeUK wrote: "You can of course buy faux book displays with which to impress your friends:-

http://www.manorbindery.co.uk/

I have a bookseller friend who often sells books by the metre to new homeowners seekin..."

*shudder* i really don't understand some people...

"A room without books is like a body without a soul"

Even thought I don't accept the existence of a soul, that is one of my favourite quotes, as you could tell by seeing my house :)

I'm quite happy with 'atheist', although I am also an anti-theist, which is what, I think, is genuinely meant when people refer to new, angry or militant atheists.

I'm registered as a donor, and I also intend to donate my remains to science, if science wants it.

UK law, however, states that the next of kin have the final say and can over ride the donor's wishes. My family know my preference and hopefully will respect it. And I won't be in position to know or care, but the fact that it isn't my final choice does bother me. I don't see any reason for not adopting an 'opt-out' system, as i believe they have in Spain, where it is assumed you are a donor unless you have registered an objection.

Xox wrote: "I like Oliver Sacks. But he is not a psychologist. He is in neuroscience. ."


Indeed, probably part of the reason I prefer him. He manages to mix some excellent science with real insight.

I wasn't dismissing 'talking cures' in general, I think many psychological treatments based on therapy (one to one or group) are extremely useful, psychoanalysis just rubs me up the wrong way. I blame that on studying Freud and Yung at college.

I think Wallace does deserve some credit, but I do generally agree with Hazel; it has been said that it was the thoroughness of research and elegance of the writing in On The Origin Of Species that was responsible for the impact of the theory.

I only recently found out about Wallace's quest for a 'life essence', and don;t know enough about it to know if it was a lifelong failing or some weakness he came to later in life, like Arthur Conan Doyle's switch from rationalism to spiritualism and belief in fairies.

I just listened to extracts being read on BBC Radio 4 and it was quite interesting. I do have my doubts about psychoanalysis - largely due to the claims of a scientific approach which don't really hold water, and the reliance on dogma, in the cases of many therapists, Freudian or Yungian or some adaptation thereof.

There were some insights, but it wasn't very clinical. I'd recommend Oliver Sacks.

MadgeUK wrote: "I think catholics will rue the day when they campaigned so vehemently against gay men and women. They are fighting a rearguard action and it won't be long before actions like this turn even more p..."

Absolutely. The most powerful message I've seen on this is the poster in US demonstrations with picture of two men being married beside a picture of an black/white 'mixed' marriage from the '60s.

The christmas messages by most of the church leaders - the Archbish of Canterbury, the Catholic leaders in England and Scotland, as well as Ratzinger - were abhorrent all round. They are so obsessed with the "danger of gay marriage" they are practically frothing at the mouth, and the vast majority of people, even many of those against marriage equality, seem perturbed or even disgusted by the venom. I'm starting to think that Ratzinger may actually have gone la-la (actual psychological definition) with the regularity he is spewing hateful, incendiary crap.

Still, every time I see he's in the news I just hear Tim Minchin's Pope Song in my head, so that makes me smile.

(If you haven't heard it, look it up - just not with children within earshot)

Interesting and fairly well-balanced article from the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20...

Mike Stygal, is a secondary school teacher who practises paganism in his private life. He believes in a divine force in nature. "I believe everything is connected, I feel very in touch with nature and the changing seasons. Awe is a very good word for how I feel. It's a sense of deep respect for nature. I can communicate with the deity."

If you remove the first clause and last sentence from that statement, that's fine - it describes pretty much how I feel - but then adding the 'deity' stuff just makes it gibberish.

I've submitted a comment (short essay!) on why you don't need any sort of spirituality OR religion to feel in awe or wonder at the universe.

On the idea that there is a correlation between 'spirituality' and mental illness, this doesn't surprise me at all, simply as many the people attracted to many 'new age' beliefs are bound to have problems recognising reality from wishful thinking, may have been through various religious backgrounds and must struggle with appalling cognitive dissonance on a constant basis.