/lit/ - Literature

>>18133371
>Why would someone make a disingenuous argument?
Let me guess, he wrote a book that he is trying to sell?

If someone isn't a creationist, then are they really a believer?

>>18133371
His entire book The God Delusion is basically all straw man shit, misreading, misrepresentation, etc.

>>18133371
Mitchel and Webb called him out for being a sensationalist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwQ-_g8KuHI

Because the most popular theisms are creationist myths.

>Scientific fanaticism: produces hubristic nerd parties when scientists get a little tipsy.
>Religious fanaticism: produces generational crusades of murder and mayhem

>>18133396
kek he sounds exactly like Dawkins

>>18133385
Maybe you should have read Hitchens instead.

>>18133384
That's what these midwits would love, that every believer was a creationist

>>18133407
Accept Jesus Christ's eternal love and repent, woman.

>>18133402
>>Religious fanaticism: produces generational crusades of murder and mayhem
Lol

>>18133402
What do you do all day

>>18133402
>Scientific fanaticism: produces hubristic nerd parties when scientists get a little tipsy.
No, scientism gets us stuff like the on-going replication crisis.

>>18133402
>Scientific fanaticism: produces hubristic nerd parties when scientists get a little tipsy
Scientific fanaticism causes pic related

>>18133426
Accept my eternal love; receive bacon.

>>18133438
Work, read, sleep, absorb some news, eat, thinking about stuff in between.

>>18133440
There’s a replicant crisis? What happened?

>>18133446
That’s economics and sociopolitical. Mofos are dragging their heels about approving spütnik purely on political grounds

>>18133474
>There’s a replicant crisis? What happened?
No, a replication crisis. 70% of scientific experiments found in modern published papers are bullshit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

>>18133446
Scientific fanaticism creates clickabaity titles? I agree I guess

>>18133485
What experiments are they? I suspect it’s corporatists buying bullshit like clean coal. Or glyphosate is same(ish) enough to eat

>>18133371
I think he also has a problem with Christians pretending evolution is easily reconciled with Scripture.

>>18133485
What experiments are they? I suspect it’s corporatists buying bullshit like clean coal or that glyphosate is safe(ish) enough to eat

>>18133499
Experiments published by all sorts of scientific institutions, magazines, research centers, etc. It's not labelled a crisis just because.

>>18133509
>>18133510

>>18133510
No, I get it. I just think it’s another cancer of state-capitalism. We don’t call Pinker Ass for nothing

Dawkins doesn't just have stupid ideas, he himself is dumb and a midwit.

>>18133438
Confuses being a tripfag with e-fame and spends her time on 4chan because no self-respecting man will give her his caterpillar. She knows the only eggs she'll ever lay are on here.

>>18133520
Pretty much, yea. They publish bullshit studies to justify their existence as an institution and to secure government/private funding. It is pretty much a cancer of state-capitalism like you said.

>>18133522
Such as?

>>18133553
An anti-phenomenological materialist objectivism of modern day scientism.

>>18133553

>>18133396
surprisingly funny

>>18133553

Waiting

>>18133660

No me, but you're an ideologue who likes Richard Dawkins and sees his anti-religious ranting as on par with someone like Huston Smith or even Mircea Elide.

There's no point arguing that he goes after low-hanging fruit with you because you're no different, ideologically, than an evangelical or born-again fundamentalist.

You appear on a board and it adds novelty because you've built up a trip as if you're somehow memorable. The thing is, you just say the same nonsense repeatedly and have the exact same discussions time and again.

I've only been posting on /lit for like 2 weeks (haha "newfag") and I can already see you're a tired dried-up midwit who will never grow as a person. Just get another cat, I'm sure you own at least one, and fuck off from the internet.

>>18133735
The first three responses, you have to admit, are subpar dumb midwitery. Now this. You give me four paragraphs of nothing but assumptions. You don’t know what I think of Dawkins.
I guess you’re just not prepared to cite a damn thing. The lot of you.

>>18133772
you aren't the real butters

>>18133735
Were you in the Muslim thread days ago when she got BTFO?

>>18133774
I am, but who cares? Whataya want?

>>18133775
post link anon
>>18133778
want to have sex with u

>>18133772
>Paragraphs
Sentence you dumb bitch. However, anyone whose seen you on more than one thread could write volumes about your patheticness.

>>18133775
I missed that one; I'm sure it happens a lot though. (However, someone who uses a tripcode the way she does is most likely blissfully ignorant of when they've been owned--she can't even deal with a broad criticism of Dawkins, she has to resort to asking for piecemeal examples so she can just regurgitate his shit. Fucking pathetic.

>>18133402
>chad conquering religion vs the virgin nerd science

>>18133780
>>18133802
Here's the link >>/lit/thread/S18057200

>>18133802
I think he means when a philosophy major came in and claimed everything one knows is derived from faith. I don’t fucking care anymore how you people ruin your minds. Nothing is real, nothing changes. I got it.

>>18133817
>things were so based back then. I wish I was a first born who gets conscripted on the sovereigns campaign against the enemy X, and I get to march in the vanguard and go down figh— *arrow through the eye*

>>18133833
Oh, I was there actually. I rolled for pages before bed and got 00 (straight to bed).

>>18133841
Yes religion is able to subsume all under its authority and dictate the movements of life and death and thereby produce great and noble valor. Science breeds decadence and fear and breeds nihilism.
>For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

>>18133865
>no such thing as christian nihilism
>Christians are never decadent
Oh, child...

>>18133833
>>18133841

Actually, it was 000.

Also, the argument was phenomenological (not hard skepticism that everything is faith-based). Of course, an ideologue like this stupid bitch would construe things that way because she isn't used to challenging her own ideas and sees 4chan as a way to form a personal celebrity (pretty self-centered if you ask me...especially when a lot of people treat this forum as a way to have open discussions as anons).

>>18133520
Liberal leftism is indeed a cancer, but the replication crises has close to nothing to do with Capitalism (your bogeyman and the reason for why everything is bad in the world) as it primarily affects the already tenuous """sciences""" of sociology, psychology, economics, and medicine, and not actual sciences like chemistry or physics (whose only suffering is caused by a misallocation of mental, temporal, and capital resources into retarded theories like string theory).
Read Hayek, Popper, and Putnam to get a better grounding for this whole thing :)

>>18133883
I neither said nor implied that

>>18133913
>phenomenological
Don’t believe the word was even brought up. Stupid philosophy majors.

>>18133914
>the reason for why everything is bad in the world
Most everything. Doing the alternative would leave a healthy dose of challenges and fun.
> sociology, psychology, economics, and medicine
Not hard sciences at all. Medicine is the only one I’d call a real science actually
>… misallocations ... capital resources into retarded theories like string theory
So you hate capitalism too? Ha! And string theory is trying to make Plato’s dreams come true. C’mon

>>18133402
because of science much more people have died for its discoveries and its inventions, see the multiform killing machines it has been producing, in the last century science has killed more than the entire history of religious conflicts, and i'm only counting humans, you don't even want to imagine if this was extended to animals.
(also, without religion there is nothing at all, human species would be extinct, this is why the religious and politcal are intimately related, making it kind of normal to generate conflicts, don't you think, retard?).

>>18133402
>Scientific fanaticism: produces hubristic nerd parties when scientists get a little tipsy.
Scientific fanaticism produces shit like the eugenics movement and by proxy Nazi Germany.
>b-but that isn't considered reel science anymore!
Right, why would you put your faith in our current science sticking around anymore than eugenics, safe cigarettes, asbestos, lead gasoline, etc.?

>>18133610
I think Billy's comment is reasonable.

>>18133969
Something is driving scientific discovery. One is curiosity but also profits. A lot of it is a money making scheme. Remove the profit motive and you can probably slow the scientific discoveries, or at least the worst aspects of it. It was science that alerted us to climate degradation and inform us on resource depletion.

State-capitalism is a secularist faith that uses science. That aspect of the machine is what’s to blame. No pne of uncle Ted’s kids have been interested in telling me why he doesn’t agree with this
You parenthetical is nonsensical. I’ll cut you some slack and ignore it.

>>18133961
Actually, my major was math/psych. I started in poli Sci/history and realised poli sci was full of retards so I switched. (I did get a minor in history of science and a partial in english). I also took electives in astronomy, geology, and biology. (Yes, history of science had a fuck tonne of philosophy in it but I can't think of a single prof I had who didn't have a STEM degree)

What sciences did you take at a formal university level?

>>18133371
Evolution is nonsense. Read Guenon.

>>18133371
because the popular sphere for academics is spearheaded by pseudo-intellectual rhetoricians speaking several orders of magnitude outside of their fields

truth doesn't get u clicks and book deals. bullshit, hyperbole, strawman arguments, and self-unaware spectacle creation does.

>>18133991
As a racist/statist appendage. This wasn’t your much squawked over “scientism”

And I don’t put faith in it. It’s a thing to be tested repeatedly. Gonna get postmodernist on me again?

>>18134051
You don’t sound American

>>18134053
Nonsense

>>18134091
I'm not. What formal science education do you have? (Not that I'm saying that having a degree makes one's opinions automatically better than others--if you're going to flout that your knowledge base is superior to a "philosophy major" I'd like to know).

>>18134053
Spooky

>>18134091
You put faith in the people doing the testing.

>>18134034
i agree capitalism deforms everything, but there can't be capitalism in a traditional civilization (or literally just civilization), it can only occur in its subversion, the deicide, the regicide, that is secularism. secularism could only reach where it reached through murder. you are a radical capitalism supporter and you don't even realize because you are LITERALLY BRAINWASHED.
(there are books exactly on what i typed in parentheses, but since you don't read i won't even recommend them to you; but you can make comparative religious studies and see what i told you in myths from greeks to the most obscure south american tribes).

>>18134118
I never claim to be superior. I haven’t much education in anything. I’m just a full time working autodidact that was kept out of school as a child but enjoys learning new things

>>18133735
Based newfag.

Evolution and religion are easily compatible, and essentially the same thing I would argue.

>>18134135
Ok. That's fine. I'll ask you a few questions (if you don't want to answer them, that's fine).

Did you have religious doctrine forced upon you as a kid?
What scholarship have you read outside of standard New Atheism stuff (e.g. Harris/Dawkins/Hitchens)?
What have you read with regard to the history of science?
Have you read any philosophy of science, historically minded or otherwise (basics like Kuhn, Feyerabend, Lakatos, Barnes/Bloor, and/or Latour)?

>>18134123
Can we trust Monsanto when they say their pesticide/herbicide/fungicide glyphosate isn’t harming people?
I have maybe a peculiar habit of applying some of my limited knowledge of psychology and socioeconomics to such claims.
When the Hubble discovers things in the cosmos, I tend to let the information in more freely.

>>18134126
>you are a radical capitalism supporter
No no. Complete opposite. I’m an anarchist.
What reason is given for religion keeping humans from going extinct?

>>18134161
>Did you have religious doctrine forced upon you as a kid?
Yeah.
>What scholarship have you read outside of standard New Atheism stuff (e.g. Harris/Dawkins/Hitchens)?
Just my own thoughts, I suppose.
>What have you read with regard to the history of science?
Not much. Connections ?
>Have you read any philosophy of science, historically minded or otherwise (basics like Kuhn, Feyerabend, Lakatos, Barnes/Bloor, and/or Latour)?
No. I’ve heard of some of them

>>18133402
Scientism arguably gave us stuff like eugenics.

>>18134179
>I have maybe a peculiar habit of applying some of my limited knowledge of psychology and socioeconomics to such claims.
That habit is literally called bias. You can't trust Monsanto because of Captain Planet-tier understanding of corporations, which, I mean, a broken clock is right twice a day. Why should anyone nessarily trust Hubble more? Because the experts said so?

>>18134184
Racist monkeys took Darwins discoveries and nailed their bullshit to it. If a Legit scientist bought into that, he should be branded a fanatic of scientism.

>>18134205
>bias
It’s questioning a suspicious source. Following the money because I distrust capitalists

>>18134206
Eugenics was very popular among scientists in the late 19th and early 20th century, cf. Gould's The Mismeasure of Man. Ironically, the catholic church was a major oppositor to it, because eugenics implied in euthanasia and contraception, to which catholics objected.

>>18134214
Thanks for proving and elaborating on my point, you retarded eunuch.

>>18134234
Do you oppose journalism or what?

>>18134179
Sometimes when we're indoctrinated with something, be it voluntary or involuntary, our impulse is to react as harshly against it as our mind will allow. This is an exchange of ideology and not an escape from it. A feeling of personal growth may be illusory; it's best to reflect on what type of feelings you associate with assuredness when it comes to Atheism.

I'm not going to knock you for not reading outside of the New Atheists. You should probably do so if you have such strong opinions regarding it. Even Christopher Hitchens appreciated (pic); he himself recommended it and you can start there if you want.

Connections was good; this one is better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq1YvlBnubQ (He covers the equivalent of a first-year survey course in Hist/Phil of science; it isn't rigorous but it's a good intro to the subject).

If you're going to read any of them, you can start with Kuhn (he's very accessible and usually the first philosopher/historian of science undergrads to whom undergrads are introduced). His main book is The Structure of Scientific Revolutions...there's a single chapter you can read that basically sums up the entire book if you don't want to read the entire thing (I think it's IX or X..I'll check).

>>18134053
That doesn't make creationism real anyways

>>18134140

>>18134206
>Racist monkeys took Darwins discoveries and nailed their bullshit to it.
Darwin's book lends itself to racism quite easily. The full title is "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."

>>18133402
You are Mrs cringe

>>18133402
>>Religious fanaticism: produces generational crusades of murder and mayhem
Based

>>18134483
kek

Wait, You guys actually belive in evolution? You deny the story of creation and you dare call yourself a beleiver??!! Lol, you are nothing more than a midwit heretic, you're no better than Dawkins. true belivers don't try to reconcile science with religion, religion always has the last word, if Islam says 2+2=5 then 2+2=5 , end of discussion.

t.muzzie

>>18133402
what happened to you butters?

>>18133509
It's less common on the "Hard" Sciences but it's creeping in there as well (with the exception of Mathematics). And yes, in those cases it's likely due to corporations buying scientists.

>>18134053
Guenon is nonsense. Read Darwin.

>>18133402
>Religious fanaticism: produces generational crusades of murder and mayhem
Scientific Communism my ass, get gulag'd.

>>18133410
Explain the disconnect between Christianity and scientific discoveries then?
>Inb4 the Bible is meant to be read metaphorically.

>>18134292
Thank you for your kind and helpful reply

>>18135108
>Stalin made the weather go bad once!
The entire capitalist system continues to kill people, and you remain mute about it.
The US has their own slave labor complexes. I’d rather live in Irkutsk.

>>18135174
I don't know what you're talking about.

>asking any kind of question is ‘fanaticism’
Amazing how this doesn’t make christturds realize this says more about their own beliefs than that of their critics. Then again, self reflection has never been part of the Abrahamic tradition

>>18135273
The problem is that they don't ask questions. They already have answers. If it were only for questioning they wouldn't be fanatics.

>>18133384
based

>>18133402
>Religious fanaticism: produces generational crusades of murder and mayhem
true
>Scientific fanaticism: produces hubristic nerd parties when scientists get a little tipsy.
>what is eugenics and 19th century racialism

>>18133485
thats a gross oversimplification of a much more unique problem created by the methodology followed by those sciences and how much is valid or not

>>18134161
>Did you have religious doctrine forced upon you as a kid?
She was also molested which is why she's a "lesbian" which in reality means she's a frigid incel.

>>18133396
>>Mitchel and Webb called him out for being a sensationalist.
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwQ-_g8KuHI

the ghost delusion

>>18133407

Hitchens would be the most insufferable crank alive if he were still alive.

>>18135174
The Bible is meant to be read metaphorically.

>>18133402
incredibly simplistic view of history

>>18133371
Mental illness. When he's not raping kids on Epstein's plane he's raping a monkey in his hotel room.

>>18136526
It really isn’t. Nothing indicates that, and many things in the Bible indicate the opposite

>>18136684
You're a little dim, aren't you?

RENT
FREE

>>18133485
I fail to see how that's the result of "scientism"

>>18136690
No, you’re just a coping larper. Everything in the Bible indicates that it's supposed to be considered literally true, and considering that it’s supposedly directly inspired by the creator of the universe that we’re all commanded to obey, I don’t see how you could draw any other conclusion. Furthermore, this metaphor nonsense is little more than mental gymnastics, and the application of the mythos-logos distinction from Greek polytheism, a distinction that a good portion of Jews and Christians don’t believe in, which is much more in line with what the Bible indicates, as opposed to the coping mechanisms of types like you who are confronted with the intrinsic inaccuracy of the Bible and the actual consequences of some of the commandments from the Bible that don’t benefit you. Finally, the fact that you claim this distinction, but don’t tell how its classification is done is all the proof I need that you don’t believe in any of this either

>>18136729
I'm not him.

>>18136721
See: >>18133807

>>18133371
>creationists are a very very tiny minority
about a third of the population of the USA are creationists