[lbo-talk] god is not great is great so far

[bitch at pulpculture.org]

I just picked up _god is not Great_ and am heading into the second chapter. 
I have to say that there is no "whaling" about "how childish their beliefs 
are" in this book. What made me stop and write was that Hitchens notes that 
he objects to the notion of calling atheists "brights" (and I hope he goes 
into this more). I don't know what else Dennet and Dawkins say about 
"brights" -- that is, I don't know if they whale about the childishness of 
belief -- but Hitchens certainly isn't doing that -- and he seems to reject 
the notion that any of this is about childishness of lack thereof. Lumping 
them all together seems like a bad idea.

So far, he's written a pretty damn good overview of how it is that atheists 
are not the cold heartless folks who have no sense of awe or lack a sense 
that there is something greater than themselves. Indeed, he makes an 
inspired case for how the study of evolution and space or human behavior, 
for those who are atheists, is precisely what puts us in touch with wonder, 
awe, mystery, and beauty.

More later when I finish the book.

At 05:53 PM 10/24/2007, ravi wrote:
> >> He did not go
> >> crusading into their midst, a la Dawkins, whaling on about how
> >> childish their beliefs are, etc. That's the point!

Doug replied


> > It is? Who would do that?
> >

Ravi


>I just said who does: Richard Dawkins! Or Hitchens.

"You know how it is, come for the animal porn,
stay for the cultural analysis." -- Michael Berube

Bitch | Lab
http://blog.pulpculture.org (NSFW)