This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Fleas on the Horizon: In Defense of God

Fleas on the Horizon: In Defense of God - Comments

maton100's Avatar Comment 1 by maton100

Apologetics are irksome. I'd like to see some apologetics for Chaac. C'mon fleas!

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:51:00 UTC | #130903

Gymnopedie's Avatar Comment 2 by Gymnopedie

Uh oh, this new book takes on the dreaded New Atheists in a way not done before! Maybe by addressing the actual arguments, avoiding logical fallacies, and presenting good arguments and evidence?

... probably not.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:56:00 UTC | #130908

Inferno's Avatar Comment 4 by Inferno

Anyone else a little frightened of books promising "The End of Reason"? When did being reasonable become a horrible thing?

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:02:00 UTC | #130911

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 3 by Steve Zara

Regarding "other voices"

I am currently researching and writing a review of Vox Day's book, which is certainly not "not theological" as claimed.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:02:00 UTC | #130910

Geoff's Avatar Comment 5 by Geoff


Philip Law, academic editor and U.K./E.U. publishing director for Westminster John Knox, sought out John Haught, professor of science and religion at Georgetown University, to write God and the New Atheism, published in December. "As far as I know," Law says, "there have not been any credible responses to all of these 'new atheists.'"


Well, he got that right.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:06:00 UTC | #130914

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 6 by Diacanu

Geez, these angry little bees really, really, really, really, REALLY don't want their little con racket messed with do they?

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:08:00 UTC | #130915

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 7 by Diacanu


Letter to a Secular Culture, described as "a well-reasoned case for the many benefits of faith."


I don't suppose believing in something that isn't a delusion will turn out to be one of those benefits.

Unless there's proof of God in there, I don't give a shit.

I don't care if belief in Santa cures hemorrhoids, I fucking refuse to fucking believe in fucking Santa.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:14:00 UTC | #130917

HourglassMemory's Avatar Comment 8 by HourglassMemory

My God! These are Trekies who mean business!

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:15:00 UTC | #130918

Cartomancer's Avatar Comment 9 by Cartomancer

Blimey, not since the heady twelfth-century days of Petrus Alfonsi's Dialogue between a Christian a Jew and a Philosopher and Robert of Ketton's Latin Koran for the purpose of refuting the Muslims have we had so many frightened religious people desperate to pretend there is a credible case for their beliefs.

Funny how we only need one or two books to refute religiosity but they need to keep churning the fleas out ad nauseam. I guess that's because, while things like The God Delusion, God is not Great, and even the works of Bertrand Russell make the case in an explicitly confrontational way, pretty much every good book ever published on science, philosophy, history, morality and any other credible academic subject makes the case eloquently too in its own way. Likewise, all works of fiction weigh in as refutations of religion by showing up how much it has in common with them. Even religious books, and even the flea books, have something to contribute - by explicitly showing us how pathetic the case for the defence is and what lengths these mind viruses will make people go to to defend their pathology.

So read a book, ANY book, and you've got a part of the case against religion in your hands already! The only way you can avoid it is to cease reading any more books at all!

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:43:00 UTC | #130921

Dr Benway's Avatar Comment 10 by Dr Benway

Q: How is a publisher like a divorce lawyer?

Hachette published Hitchens's God Is Not Great through its Twelve imprint, which led FaithWords, another Hachette house, to want to respond.
Conflict pays, baby.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:45:00 UTC | #130922

SPS's Avatar Comment 11 by SPS

Steve,
I can't wait to read your review.

I think there's something to be said for atheist spirituality of the non-fairytale variety, involving introspection, honest communication, and a positive attitude towards possibilities minus the dogma.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:46:00 UTC | #130923

robert s's Avatar Comment 12 by robert s

How to Be a Good Atheist explains the five types of atheism

I'm guessing type 1 is the type that doesn't believe in any gods.

Anyone know what the other 4 are?

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:56:00 UTC | #130927

Goldy's Avatar Comment 13 by Goldy

Henry VIII was an early flea :-) He did it for...hmmm, why did he do it? Anyway, didn;t help him much - the pope wouldn't let him divorce and look how all that ended up!
Defend faith all you like, fleas. It doesn't always thank you in ways you'd wish.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:03:00 UTC | #130930

Gymnopedie's Avatar Comment 14 by Gymnopedie

I think a huge part of the faith crowd simply sees faith as an integral part of a healthy life and see an attack on faith at best mean-spirited and at worst a dangerous subversion of society. The next wave of arguments should shift to the benefits of persisting in reality based thinking instead of delusion, regardless of the so-called benefits of faith.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:14:00 UTC | #130937

NormanDoering's Avatar Comment 15 by NormanDoering

Steve Zara wrote:

I am currently researching and writing a review of Vox Day's book, ...


Please drop a link onto the comments section of my blog post about Vox Day here:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/01/just-one-more-of-vox-days-lies-andor.html

I haven't yet seen a good atheist review of Day's book.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:28:00 UTC | #130943

LorienRyan's Avatar Comment 16 by LorienRyan

We've heard all the ad hominems and seen the burning of the straw men by the fleas, is it too much to ask for some evidence?

It seems 'quantity not quality' is the motto for fleadom.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:31:00 UTC | #130945

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 17 by Diacanu

LorienRyan-

(Gym teacher from Simpsons)

Bombardment!! Bombardment!! Bombardment!!

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:41:00 UTC | #130955

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 18 by Diacanu

Brian English-


That's it in a nutshell. It doesn't matter how it makes you feel. Is it true is what matters.


There's more evidence to believe in flying saucers than there is for God.

And yet, people who believe in flying saucers are snarkily called "buffs".

What moved christians from a small pitiful band of Jesus buffs, to having their crap indulged by society?

Sure as hell wasn't proof of their God.

Oh, that's right, it was Constantine, the council of Nicea, and the bullying of the catholic church for the next few centuries.

Nah, fuck it, christians, you're Jesus buffs.

Your conversion stories impress me as much as Bubbah's alleged anal probing.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:52:00 UTC | #130959

jonjermey's Avatar Comment 19 by jonjermey

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win. I'd say we're entering Phase 3 now...

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:52:00 UTC | #130960

Quine's Avatar Comment 20 by Quine

... there will be response books, and lots of them.


Fine. We will feed them to our rottweiler. She is just getting up to speed, and once she gets a good agent, will be set for the foreseeable future.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 18:53:00 UTC | #130962

pkruger's Avatar Comment 21 by pkruger

The only thing the flea authors are worried about is the potential millions of dollars believers will no longer dish out blindly to their local church/evangelist after they become non-believers.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 19:50:00 UTC | #130974

notsobad's Avatar Comment 22 by notsobad

The insecurity rises...

Blogger and political columnist Vox Day comes at the issues from a nontheological perspective in The Irrational Atheist (BenBella, Feb.), relying on factual evidence to counter atheist claims ... that the Bible and other sacred texts are unreliable and fictitious.

The Bible and other texts? It must be busy on Mount Olympus.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:01:00 UTC | #130978

OverUsedChewToy's Avatar Comment 23 by OverUsedChewToy

A theist wrote a book called "The End of Reason". Well, at least he's honest about its contents- no misleading titles here :D

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:18:00 UTC | #130982

WhoDatNinja's Avatar Comment 24 by WhoDatNinja

So read a book, ANY book, and you've got a part of the case against religion in your hands already! The only way you can avoid it is to cease reading any more books at all!


Many children in Islamic countries have access to only one book; the Qur'an. This actually surprised me when Ayaan Hirsi Ali mentioned it in a video posted here a couple of days ago, though in hindsight I suppose it shouldn't have.

On a separate note, I'd be interested to know what percentage of the books sold by someone like McGrath are purchased by atheists like ourselves. I'd be willing to bet the number is quite high.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:33:00 UTC | #130986

dkv's Avatar Comment 25 by dkv

The needless debate is going to kill the reason of science... In many cases the rationalist apply the principle of "I dont know" but in the case of God.. they aggressively pull the defenceless God.
Blasphemy challenge... the root of all evil etc have ruined the successful attempt at evolution.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:51:00 UTC | #130997

MaxD's Avatar Comment 26 by MaxD

I laughed out loud when I read this title....

The Delusion of Disbelief: Why the New Atheism Is a Threat to Your Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness


I mean how did they find out our game plan? I thought we agreed at the meetings to keep that secret? I could have sworn at the meeting Richard, Hitch, Harris and Dennett all told us that it was to be kept under wraps until we had unveild the new black uniforms. We all clapped three times turned in circle, ate some bacon and beef and pissed on a cross to seal the deal?
Was I just dreaming?

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:09:00 UTC | #131001

Teratornis's Avatar Comment 27 by Teratornis


Publishers generally agree that apologetics publishing will persist, but the trend of huge sales in the category may be dying. Zondervan's Delffs believes "the market is always open to authentic, well-written apologetics titles." Baugher says, "Apologetics will always be around, but there will be more titles and higher sales as long as contrary titles continue to sell well." HarperOne's Tauber doesn't think there are "many more huge books left in the category." Says Anfuso at Free Press, "You have to examine these books much closer now, sales-wise, because there are so many. It's a topic that will continue, but it can't sustain these huge sales. It's not going to become perennial, like diet books." BenBella publisher Glenn Yeffeth believes that as the political climate changes, particularly if a more liberal presidential candidate is elected, the chorus will die down.


Perhaps the futility of apologetics is proportional to the number of titles. Consider: if it were possible to make a rational case for believing in things without evidence, only one apologetics book would be necessary. The fact that so many are cropping up suggests that Christians understand none of the titles on offer suffice to vanquish doubt.

It's encouraging to see the new atheists have managed to change the priorities for theists. The more resources theists have to divert to talking themselves into continuing to believe what they claim they believed all along, the fewer resources they will have to bomb abortion clinics and organize against stem cell research.

I can't resist drawing a very crude analogy with the way al-Qaeda managed to completely change the priorities of the U.S. government. Obviously the analogy fails early and often, but even if the neocons manage to hunt down and kill every last al-Qaeda recruit, al-Qaeda will still have been a success if its goal was to goad the U.S. into wasting several trillion dollars.

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 23:37:00 UTC | #131023

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 28 by Diacanu

Thank goodness for the internet.

Back in the old days, the newspapers would publish some drivel from an apologist, the atheist response couldn't even get a look in, and that'd be that.

People would swallow the apologetic hoo-hah, everything back to crappy normal, the end.

But look how much info we have at our fingertips.

Look how many of us are just normal shlubs, and in a short span, we've mastered atheist debate ju-jitsu as well as some pros.

The genie's out of the bottle.
One has to studiously go out of their way to be one of the duped masses at this point.

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:36:00 UTC | #131036

JemyM's Avatar Comment 30 by JemyM

Because God surely needs a human bodyguard who defend him against other humans.

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:44:00 UTC | #131039

LorienRyan's Avatar Comment 29 by LorienRyan

Diacanu,

Was just reading some comments along the same lines on another thread and I wholeheartedly agree. This site really is a great resource. An oasis of reason.

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:44:00 UTC | #131038