Another argument we get a lot of is the ‘You’re defining religion too narrowly’ one. The ‘Religion is anything and everything that’s not science, not numerical, not proven’ one. Err – that covers a lot of territory! To put it mildly. Let’s see – I like Austen better than Trollope, and I also think Austen is a better writer than Trollope; I think I can offer evidence for the reasonableness of that view, but I certainly can’t prove it, or establish it beyond a reasonable doubt – because it’s not the kind of thing one can prove or establish beyond a reasonable doubt. Just as I can’t prove that I like someone, or that someone is my friend, or that … Read the rest
All entries by this author
EU Constitution and the God Question 
May 25th, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Italy, Poland, Vatican want Christianity in; France, UK, Spain, Scandinavia don’t.… Read the rest
Never on Sontag?
May 25th, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
David Aaronovitch reads Susan Sontag on Abu Ghraib, colonialism and violence.… Read the rest
The Military Censor Sorry Liaison
May 25th, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Principal fires teacher for failure to censor students’ anti-war poetry. ACLU lawsuit pending.… Read the rest
The Stop the War Coalition: A Monumentally Successful Failure
May 25th, 2004 | By Phil DoréAround the time of the huge demonstrations of February 15 th 2003, the Stop the War Coalition had emerged as one of the biggest protest movements in British history, yet it failed to achieve its goal of preventing war in Iraq. Moreover, within weeks of the February protests, the STWC had gone into decline with startling rapidity. Its core activists were unable to capitalise on the huge groundswell of support they had received prior to the war in Iraq , and it was to become dogged by poor leadership and vulnerable to hijack by political and religious extremists.
The Stop the War Coalition had been formed on September 21 st 2001 in London , in the wake of the September … Read the rest
Yes but Why?
May 24th, 2004 10:14 pm | By Ophelia BensonYes but why bother? goes one argument we get a lot of. What’s the point? You’re never going to convince anyone. Religion is never going to go away. So why all this disagreement? Anthony Flew calls this the ‘But-those-people-will-never-agree Diversion.’ (How to Think Straight p. 61)
If one is trying to thrash out some generally acceptable working compromise on how things are to be run, then one must consider the various sticking points of all concerned. But if instead you are inquiring into what is in fact the case and why, then that someone refuses to accept that this or that is true is neither here nor there.
Just so. And that is the question we’re looking at: the … Read the rest
Mugabe Calls Tutu Evil
May 24th, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
And refuses international food aid, citing desire not to be choked.… Read the rest
Credulous Sociology In Place of Aesthetics
May 24th, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
James Wood reviews The Oxford English Literary History.… Read the rest
Calling India’s Freethinkers
May 24th, 2004 | By Meera Nanda[Note: Murli Manohar Joshi was the minister of Human Resource Development and Science and Technology under the BJP government. He led the campaign to Hinduize education in public schools and universities. He was the architect of the Vedic astrology programs introduced in Indian colleges and universities in 2001.]
Murli Manohar Joshi has learned the hard way that astrology does not work after all. The will of the Indian voters has overturned the alignment of auspicious stars in the astrological charts of the BJP, just as it has defied the numerology of the pollsters.
Indian voters have thrown out the obscurantist-in-chief and the party he represented. Even though most of the 370-million-strong voters did not consciously set out to punish the … Read the rest
Kuldip Nayar on Indian Secularism
May 23rd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
‘The fight between secularism and chauvinism is nothing new.’… Read the rest
Round up the Albanian Suspects
May 23rd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Macedonian government staged a shootout with pretend ‘terrorists’.… Read the rest
Atheist Roots of Hindu Philosophy
May 23rd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Disagreement among schools is over the authority of the Vedas, not a deity.… Read the rest
Is Islam Gay-friendly?
May 23rd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Not quite as friendly as the Vatican.… Read the rest
Conversation-stopper
May 22nd, 2004 9:19 pm | By Ophelia BensonAnd some more serendipitous reading that makes the same point I’ve been making. I happened to pick up a collection of essays by Richard Rorty and found ‘Religion as Conversation-stopper.’ Just so – my point exactly. And Rorty takes issue with Stephen Carter’s The Culture of Disbelief.
… Read the restThe main reason religion needs to be privatized is that, in political discussion with those outside the relevant religious community, it is a conversation-stopper. Carter is right when he says: ‘One good way to end a conversation – or start an argument – is to tell a group of well-educated professionals that you hold a political position (preferably a controversial one, such as being against abortion or pornography) because it is required
Ideas via Import-Export, not Creation
May 22nd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
People with cohesive social networks tend to think and act the same.… Read the rest
What Has a Bad Survey to do With Paleontology?
May 22nd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Nothing, but paleontology sounds impressive, so stick on the label.… Read the rest
What Has Theology to do With Homosexuality?
May 22nd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Nothing, but theologians weigh in all the same.… Read the rest
David Aaronovitch on ‘Honour’ Killlings
May 22nd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
And facile moral equivalency.… Read the rest
Hari on Galloway on Saddam
May 22nd, 2004 |
Filed by Ophelia Benson
Describing mass murder as civil war.… Read the rest
Proof of Astrology?
May 22nd, 2004 | By Ivan W. KellyThe British astronomer Percy Seymour has recently published a new book entitled The Scientific Proof of Astrology (2004). Two reviews of the book were published in the mainline press—Ian Sample’s “Written in the Stars” (The Guardian, May 18, 2004), and Johnathan Leake’s “Top Scientist Gives Backing to Astrology” (Sunday Times, May 16, 2004). Both articles are misleading in some ways in which they present the information.
For a start, Seymour’s recent ideas aren’t overly different from those he published in Astrology: The Evidence of Science (1988), revised edition (1990), and The Scientific Basis of Astrology (1997). Seymour is not interested in star -sign horoscopes so popular with much of the astrological community. You will also look … Read the rest
