🚀 go-pugleaf

rbwinn wrote:
> On Jul 10, 5:20�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
>> Alex W. wrote:
>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>> news:08134c4b-46c5-454f-9a5f-47756eddfd59@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> Without religion to oppose, atheists would do nothing at all.
>> Thats not true. They just would walk away from any discussion on the
>> subject thankfully, and get on with living, and in some case, trying to
>> understand the extraordinary universe we seem to find ourselves in.
>>
>> Really the transition fom a Gaia type animism picture of the universe,
>> to a personalised supernatural creator and law giver, to an impersonal
>> set of amoral laws..is not as abrupt as the fanboys would like to think.
>>
>> What is unusual, historically, is the fanatical faith needed to maintain
>> the concept of a personal and moral God, in the face of Reason.
>>
>> Mediaevally speaking, no one questioned that the world and events moved
>> according to some vast and ineffable and mysterious pattern, and the
>> concept of a supernatural intelligence and a plan, was pretty
>> reasonable..until science started uncovering the rules, which turned out
>> to be mindlessly simple, totally impersonal and implacable, and
>> impervious to personal appeal. And no evidence of intelligence at all.
>>
>> Note that none of this necessarily negates the proposition that faith,
>> belief, prayer, and a live lived AS IF there were an afterlife,is not a
>> Good Thing for people and civilisations.
>>
>> But none of these even indicate that what is believed in must of
>> necessity be true.
>>
>> Archers were able to hit targets long before Newton identified the Force
>> of Gravity.
>>
>> Understanding of the presumed science behind phenonmena is no
>> pre-requisite for learning to deal with them. Any ad-hoc theory that has
>> pragmatic use will do.
>>
>> If you look at religion in that light, it makes a lot of sense.
>>
>> Mired in dogma however, the fanatical Theist simply persists in the
>> useless, long past its sell-by date.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> ==========
>>> ..... other than get on with our lives ....- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
> 
> If atheists want to believe that they are not intelligent, I see no
> problem with that.
> Robert B. Winn
And how is that in any way relevant to what I posted?